"Be on the alert, stand firm in the faith, act like men, be strong. Let all that you do be done in love."
Summer's over and it's time to get back to the Calvinista routine. Which routine you might ask? Conferences, conferences, conferences… Who has the money to attend all these events anyway?
Well, here's the latest offering from Mark Driscoll, James MacDonald, Matt Chandler, Greg Laurie, and others. It's called Act Like Men. I don't know about you, but Driscoll and MacDonald are not what I consider to be terrific role models for how Christian men should act. Just search our previous posts about them, and you'll see that there are definitely some problems.
To get a taste of the © 2013 Act Like Men conference , take a look…
Yes, even though the phrase 'act like men' appears in Bible, it's now copyrighted by this crowd. This brings back memories of the legal wrangling over the trademark for Mars Hill. We covered that debacle in a post called The Branding of Mars Hill.
So what's the real focus of this conference? Perhaps the following question and answer under the FAQ section will shed some light…
Q: What is the recommended age for the Act Like Men Conference? Can I bring my teenage son?
A: The Act Like Men conference is appropriate for young men and men ages 13 & up. All content presented by the speakers will be candid and biblically based dealing with issues men face today. Note: may not be suitable for pre-teens or young teens but is geared toward a more mature audience.
The © 2013 Act Like Men conference will take place at three venues, specifically:
Hamilton, Ontario (October 4-5)
Long Beach, California (October 18-19)
Indianapolis, Indiana (November 8-9)
Here are the speakers explaining why this conference is so important.
In order to act like men, attendees will need to don the appropriate attire, so they might want to go ahead and order the Conference Gear. Actually, only the t-shirt is being sold prior to the conference, and the link (which takes you to James MacDonald's website) is not working at the time of this writing. You know what they say – the clothes make the man… Also, to see the © 2013 Act Like Men sponsors (Walk in the Word, Resurgence, Acts 29, etc.), scroll down past the t-shirts, baseball caps and hoodies to the bottom of the virtual catalog.
And if you want to advertise the conference, look how easy the promoters have made it for you (link). No doubt churches and men's groups around the country will be pushing this event in the coming days. We're curious… Has your church or Christian group started promoting © 2013 Act Like Men yet? Please keep us updated. 🙂
Oh, and remember, this event is FOR MEN ONLY!
Since Driscoll, MacDonald and gang have copyrighted the conference name – © 2013 Act Like Men – I wondered whether anyone else had used that phrase (besides Almighty God, of course!)
Perhaps these mature, manly men are clueless as to the fact that a documentary was released just last year with an interesting title:
Act Like Men: A Titanic Lesson in Manliness
The DVD is from the award-winning producers of Indoctrination, which we reviewed (link). Here is some additional information on the Vision Forum website:
Act Like Men was produced for the 100th anniversary of the Titanic's sinking with the intention to inspire today's generation to pursue godly manhood. Featuring Scott Brown, William Einwechter, Bill Potter, and Kevin Swanson, this documentary tells the true story of the Titanic and compares the manly response of its passengers and crew with the weakening of modern morality, as evidenced by recent events such as the partial sinking of the Italian cruise ship Costa Concordia.
Watch this timely film with your entire family, and discover why it's time to once again act like men.
Act Like Men was a semi-finalist in the 2013 San Antonio Independent Christian Film Festival.
Kevin Swanson (remember Dee's post on womb tomb babies?) gives us an overview of the documentary.
How coincidental that these two hyper-masculine groups – the Driscoll/MacDonald 'tribe' and the Vision Forum crowd – have tried to capitalize on the 'Biblical' phrase ACT LIKE MEN. I'll leave it up to you to decide whether Driscoll and gang came up with this conference slogan on their own…
In closing, I am so tired of Christians who want to teach young men how to be 'real men' for a price. Vision Forum markets its DVD, etc., and the Driscoll/MacDonald 'tribe' charges over $100 per person to attend a two-day event — remember food, housing, transportation and conference gear are (in all likelihood) NOT included.
Want to know the secret to stamping out the merchandising of masculinity? It has to do with economics. Decreased demand (of conferences and resources) results in a decreased supply. And that's what we really need!
We leave you with a video that would fit in well at the © 2013 Act Like Men conference.
Lydia's Corner: Esther 1:1-3:15 1 Corinthians 11:17-34 Psalm 35:17-28 Proverbs 21:19-20
In the video at the top of this post, James MacDonald appears at :50 and says:
“Let sound biblical theology call you again and again.
Out of a life of compromise
Out of the life of self
Out of the life of short-sighted self-serving”
“Let all you do be done in love…”
There is a pile of dead bodies behind the Mars Hill bus (chuckle)>b>, and by God’s grace, it’ll be a mountain by the time we’re done. — Mark Driscoll
Somebody is dreaming.
I’d like to know who organized this in Canada.
The rental fee for Copps is “a minimum of $12,000 or 15% of gross ticket revenue, less admission sales taxes.”
Add in event staff payments, set up etc.
Add in whatever the Christian celeb speakers (Driscoll, MacDonald etc,) charge.
How does this further the Kingdom of God?
The Copps Coliseum seats 19 thousand (or less:^)
The GTA (Greater Toronto area) is within driving distance, as is Buffalo, Kitchener/Waterloo – but come on -the Hamilton region has high unemployment, and it seems to me that only conference addicts and professional Christians who get sheep to pay their way are going to fork out that kind of money.
What a rip off. I too am tired of the hype and greed of the Calvinist conference circuit.
I bet the Titanic video says nothing of the women who gave their lives willingly, or the many men who did not give it willingly but were forcibly kept from lifeboats by panicky male crew members who sent down lifeboats half-empty, or the men who stupidly chose to go full speed ahead in iceberg waters…
We have a nice little saying that applies perfectly to this ridiculous situation. “Put on your big girl panties and get over yourself already.”
Sounds a lot like the Promise Keepers 2013 Conference for (He)men, “Awakening the Warrior”
Why do these preachers always come and tell men to behave like men if they themselves act like the most immature adolescents imaginable.
– Driscoll (“I’d like to punch someone in the nose!”, “I can’t respect a guy I can beat up”, “There’s a pile of dead bodies behind the MH bus”, and, slightly paraphrased, “I’ll tell you everything about my s*x life you never wanted to know”)
– MacDonald (“I have the money and the pulpit, you can’t get me out of here – nyahhh!”)
– Don’t forget guys like Furtick and Ed Young, Jr.
– Megachurch preachers have no monopoly on this – IFB preachers are very advanced on the immature behaviour scale as well, always have been, as StuffFundiesLike shows us regularly.
And then they tell men to “man up”, to “be a man” (or, as Driscoll would say, “a dude, not a chickified xtian”), even though they them selves have no idea what being a man – as opposed to a spoiled teenage brat – means, none whatsoever. (Hint: regular use of your reproductive organs does NOT turn you into a man!)
These guys trigger my interior bulls**t-detector, as they would say in Startrek, “off the scale”. They are clever businessmen, yes, and their organisations are businesses, not “churches” in any meaningful sense of the word.
…as opposed to the godless librul weenie version the rest of us know. : P
If I’m not mistaken, there was also a man who was not allowed to go into a lifeboat with his young son, even though the boy would be orphaned by this action. Women and children first, y’all. Common sense be damned. Open doors for women and all society’s problems will be solved.
“Watch ye, stand fast in the faith, quit you like men, be strong.” –1 Cor. 16:13
If this is the verse you’re referring to (and I know Doug has referenced it), in context it refers to men and women because it’s part of Paul’s closing exhortations to the entire Corinthian church. Whoopsie.
@ Retha Faurie: Darn good point!
Right. Remember in Eph. 6 Paul used the metaphor of a soldier to explain “standing fast” in the faith. He could be doing something similar here, with “man” being a synonym for soldier.
Of course they’re merchandising manhood…because according to Mark Driscoll in the video…
Get the young men, you get families, the women, the children, the MONEY,…EVERYTHING! You don’t get the young men, you get NOTHING!
So when will you be targeting Joyce Meyer, Beth Moore (or Racheld Held Evand if you dare) and othets who continue to feed heretical pop-theopsychology to their predominantly female audiences? I mean your work on one side with the kinds of errant men is great but it seems quite silent on the other on the whole. And I m not talking about women in a marriage (Driscoll) or movement (TGC) who simply reflect what has originated with a male leader but these individual women or movements abusing women with error. More of that would go a long way to helping your credibility outside of a “yes woman” audience.
As for the article, those who need to prove their manliness are those who either lack it or are ignorant of what it is. Driscoll and company are the consumate rule makers. They will turn manliness into a set of rules.
Manliness grows from an inner conviction regarding one’s role in society based on natural truth and for the Christian, divine revelation. That takes a life consummated in abiding in Christ with his Word abiding in us.
I get the need for identifying boundaries and general principles so teaching on masculinity or femininity is not anti-biblical/doctrinal. Sometimes we have to learn to do what is right before we learn the why’s which are to eventually become convictions. To me Driscoll and company are enlarging the product (masculinity/femininity) and/or its development over a far greater thing, discipleship which transforms is all into spiritual adults, thus handling matters regularly with wisdom.
Again, this is not to say we do not pass on principles of masculine and feminine grace and action but these are elementary and must be filled by a far more broad theology. It seemd conferencing and merchandising for this is an imbalance of focus. I have little confidence in the work of these paper tigers.
I agree, at least about Meyer and Moore (I’ve only read a few posts by Evans so I have to claim ignorance there). We have a family friend who is really into Beth Moore and “pop-theopsychology” is a pretty good descriptor for most of the stuff she reposts and quotes. “Name it and claim it” word of faith stuff seems to be popular here too, though that might come more from Meyer (?).
After being traumatized by ‘men’ all my life. And watching that whole tough boy ‘pack’ mentality, this sort of thing brings back too many nightmares. Something deep within my soul tells me that there’s a profound hurt and abuse, that Driscoll himself, has yet to deal. Honestly, he’s seems to be emotional retarded, being stuck between maybe the 4th and 5th grade of elementary school.
And all his conference attendees, are exactly like those boys, who when no one else was looking, would treat me with decency and friendliness. But let the likes of Driscoll walk up, they’d knee me in the N*T$, laugh, and walk away with their hero(Driscoll). They have no sense of personal integrity, and must live to please the Alpha bully. What a sad state of ‘christian’ manhood!!
@ jack:I’m glad I’m not the only one who thinks that. He strikes me as very angry and hung up on sex. Its scary how much he reminds me of my dad, before he left my mom and ‘came out’.
I would say that the “name it claim it” is more pronounced in Meyer. However, what I have observed with Moore is its use in a bit of a different manner, mostly for this inward self-love and self-preoccupation in which you name it and claim it for ego rewards.
Your comment needs to be read by all. Driscoll looks like a bully to me. He has hurt a number of people, threatened to punch people in the nose, etc.
I have seen bullies like him and I have seen it in Christian schools and churches. I have watched “godly” pastors and parents turn their backs on those who are being abused. They act all “gospel-like” and then turn around and hurt one another.
i have said this before and will say it again,I believe that Driscolll, and MacDonald, are one step away from a serious personal crisis and people better keep a sharp eye on them.
The complete and utter lack of discernment in my particular Harvest plant is so distressing. A whole bunch of grown men high-fiving and grunting and all kid-like giddy over renting a bus and singing “ninety-nine bottles of beer” all the way to Indianapolis. And it’s all good because this is how Jesus wanted us to be. I want to grab them by the shirt collar… but of course nothing will do any good.
A bunch of glassy-eyed slack-jawed troglodytes beating chests to LaCrae and screaming “I love God”. Oh joy. I hope someone can film some of the proceedings. Wait… maybe I don’t even to see that. It’ll send me over the edge…
I do take some comfort in the fact that there are discerning Christians with us who also are distressed at the complete lack of discernment of some…
Alex Guggenheim wrote:
Naughty, naught,y Alex. You did not do a search for the names of these two women on our site. We HAVE written about both of them. To this day, I still get hate mail for the Beth Moore post, lesser amounts on Meyer but still there.
Here, I’ll help you out.
Also, if you read our posts, you will find that we have said that we either disagree with Evans on a topic or agree with her.
Unlike Moore and Meyer, Evans has a blog which deals with a vast array of subjects. The thought of sitting down and doing a check list of all the things she has said sounds more like a PhD thesis and gives me the cold sweats.
BTW, I hope comments reflect that they have done their due diligence and either read or listened to a fair amount of Driscoll (and company) on the matter in order to at least have a basis for a personal opinion outside of what is reported that he said or selective bits and pieces offered.
@ Alex Guggenheim: Do me a favor and do some searches on our site. we have documented a boat load of stuff Driscoll has said and even did one full post filled with Drisollese.
Alex Guggenheim wrote:
Naughty naughty Dee. You didn’t pay attention to what I said. Here it is again,
“I mean your work on one side with the kinds of errant men is great but it seems quite silent on the other on the whole.”
Not absolutely silent and I based it “one the whole” meaning the imbalance is very notable.
Details, details. But hey, who’s counting when there are so many bad men out there and the audience is by majority, women. What was that you were saying about Driscoll pandering?
While analyzing and scrutinizing the doctrines/teachings Evans (or any others) might give you the cold sweats, as someone pledged to this kind of protective ministry, it appears you would give yourself a pass here for a rather unwarranted reason, it is too daunting or something.
I was referring to the commenters, not the author of the article or the blog writers. I assume this.
Good post, Deb.
Can I trademark ©Act like cage fighters?
@ Alex Guggenheim: There are many commenters here who have had up close and personal experience with Driscoll. Some might surprise you. So, what is your “rule” for how much of Driscoll one must read before one is “allowed” to have an opinion? Two books and 3 sermons? % books 15 sermons and being tole you need to be punched in the nose?
Give us the rule and we’ll see if our readers can oblige.
Alex Guggenheim wrote:
I am not sure that your understand what is going on in the faith these days but women are not exactly allowed in any positions of power/leadership/teaching in the church or seminaries. A few who get there keep their mouths shut. So the men get their fair share of the critique since they are the “leaders.”
dee, I was addressing those who might comment but have not done their due diligence, not the ones that have. As for “rule making”, that is up to each person’s conscience but as a rule, no reading or very selective reading makes, as most academicians would tell you, for someone who is ill-informed and has not done their homework.
Alex Guggenheim wrote:
I said that she has said so many things on so many topics that it would be difficult to write a post. Suffice it to say. I agree with many things she says and disagree with some things she says. And regular readers will see quotes from her popping up in a fair number of our posts.
That is certainly expected if the numbers are by majority, men, but it serves as no excuse for you to excuse yourself from due diligence with notable female teachers of errant and confusing doctrine.
Alex Guggenheim wrote:
Beth Moore and Joyce Meyer are old news and enjoying their mountains of cash from selling Jesus. Rachel Held Evans has a large male following, too. Ever read comments?
So not sure the slipper fits in this case. Besides, I have never seen any of them put on an “Act like Women” conference specifically devoted to pink teaching. :o)
Alex Guggenheim wrote:
I don’t know about the others, but I first came in confrontation from rude, arrogant Drisconians who visited places that I went who wanted to straighten people out on our views of certain things. One being the Song of Solomon of which I’ve studied on and off for several years before I ever heard of Driscoll.
I was challenged by one of the more polite Driscollites to listen to Driscoll’s teachings so I tuned in to one of the Peasant Princes series.
As I’ve shared many time in many other places, the basic teaching on male/female relationships was mostly on par with many things I’d heard elsewhere on the subject. Some good, some mediocre, some slanted heavily in favor of the male against the female, but mostly just run of the mill gender teaching.
What shocked my socks off was when he actually got to the text of the Song of Songs. He mutilated it. He was insulting, arrogant, and so far off the deep end wrong over so many things that I stood in awe that anyone took him seriously on Bible teaching… EVER!
The man is not a Bible teacher. He’s a political leader, rallying the (male) troops and working hard to fill his war coffers and promising men certain things from their wives that he has not right to promise.
Evans’ book, A Year of Biblical Womanhood” was a joke, academically and theologically if not rationally. She was blatantly dishonest with regard to the views of those with whom she holds objections.
If one of your favored male subjects of scrutiny published a work this bad and inconsistent, you would have been all over it like mustard on a hot dog.
‘Nuff said. Driscoll seems to be a rather easy target. It does get the choir singing, though.
How many young christian women actually put up with being subjugated, the way Driscoll and others teach, today? How are young married men going to win over their wives to this life style? The young woman I know aren’t like this. It could be a hard sell in their world.
Alex Guggenheim wrote:
Alex, I first heard of DRiscoll when Donald Miller described him as the cussing pastor in Blue Like Jazz. years ago.
Been following his trajectory ever since. But I will tell you there are certain sermons (series) that would have been enough for me to know there is a HUGE problem. Also Joyful Exiles is quite interesting. And some warning sites that have popped up over the years going through behavioral events and teaching. But from listening, reading his site, listening to videos, he is like a cultural phenomenon.
To me, it is not really about Driscoll (Charlatans everywhere these days) that much but what attracts people to him. That to me would be a very interesting sociological study.
What sort of a person would be attracted to a pastor who teaches sodomy in marriage? What sort of a person would sit and listen while his pastor relates I detail visions of other people having sex even down to describing the curtains in the room.
It really would make an interesting sociological study.
Driscoll and his colleagues are making up their own rules about how to act “Godly” and “manly”. Their rules are vague and confusing, so their audience needs to buy books and tapes to further understand these rules and be acceptable to God. Parents who want their children to be saved and acceptable to God will also buy products that are supposed to teach children these rules. These men are wolves in sheep’s clothing who only want to make money through book sales, merchandising, and ticket sales.
Alex Guggenheim wrote:
Dude. I’m betting there’s a lot of us here who have done plenty of this. I spent years listening to his podcasts, and it took a LONG time for me to finally get that in spite of his preaching ability he has real problems. So, kindly don’t make silly assumptions, ‘kay? And I’ll try not to assume you’re being condescending.
Alex Guggenheim wrote:
Oh, I’m so incredibly sorry to disappoint, but if someone punches me in the nose, I don’t give a rat’s posterior whether you think I should stand around and try to tease out what deep inner feelings they might have that might be good. I’m going to get the heck out of there and not let myself be abused further, my abusers feelings be [cursed]!
Driscoll is completely irrelevant in my world, and I’m going to do everything I can do to keep it that way. That said, some in my church do follow the happenings in the YRR tribe, but I haven’t heard anything about this “Perform Like Immature Teen Boys” conference. That’s a good sign, anyway. 😀
Anon 1 wrote:
Oooh. Feeling kinda nauseous here….of course, being a lady preacher in the presence of guys who believe that women can’t be called by God tends to do that sometimes. And don’t forget, they believe in speaking to the MEN, who will BRING their women and children with them. They don’t feel like they have to speak to us. (should I be grateful?)
Anon 1 wrote:
Somebody whose “into that sort of thing” getting their porn fix while staying Respectable and Christian(TM). (As long as the sodomy isn’t HOMO!)
Joy Huff wrote:
That’s what the Pearl method is for.
Beaten into Submission from birth.
Hmmm….James MacDonald says we need to be called out of a life that is self-serving. I wonder how that applies to gambling and expensive houses…
@ dee: Real men have mansions, I guess. Driscoll can relate, I assume.
Done in love…yep that is how MacDonald and Driscoll relate…right?
The Devil attacks our wives and kids. What about them?
“Drisconians” — like the term.
i.e. Long before the Deep Throat crossover fanfic.
(And that’s what it is — bad crossover fanfic heavy on Rule 34. A guided tour through some “interesting” tracts of Celebrity Preacher mental landscape.)
“Certain things” involving Fulfilling Fantasies with both ends of the alimentary canal?
Alex Guggenheim wrote:
It could be credibly argued that books like A Year of Biblical Womanhood cause many who are appalled by her twisting of scriptures to enter the camp of Driscoll for “balance.”
Alex Guggenheim wrote:
Striking back with the oh-so-polite “You didn’t pay attention…” and the gaslight switch of “No, this is what I REALLY said, but You Are Too Ignorant and Have An AGENDA…” (Oh-so-polite pat pat pat on your pretty little airhead.)
Growing up with a psychological abuser/sociopath teaches you to recognize such things.
Alex Guggenheim wrote:
Haven’t read Rachel’s book so can’t make a judgement.
Haven’t read Driscolls’ real marriage book so can’t make my own judgement. So I’ll turn to a couple of experts, people who attended his church, listened to his teachings, and held positions of authority until they could no longer tolerate Driscoll’s excesses.
I take this couple’s word for it because I see the same things they see. Driscoll won’t deal with his own issues, not truley or deeply. But he sure as hell doesn’t mind making it look like their marriage issues were all Grace’s fault. He threw her too the wolves. Even though I have written extensively on Mark and have only touched on a few things concerning Grace, you would not believe how many hits I get concerning Grace Driscoll and her “abuse” or her supposed “affair”.
As so many have said (let me put it in caps so you don’t miss it, Alex):
MARK DRISCOLL IS NOT A MAN. HE IS A BOY, AN ADOLESCENT PLAYING AT MANHOOD.
@ Alex Guggenheim:
Alex must be a teacher. “Tsk tsk children! Now do your homework and remember I know the Wikipedia entries by heart.”
@ Headless Unicorn Guy:
It could also be credibly argued that people like Driscoll&McDonald cause many who are appalled by their twisting of scripture to leap straight over Evans and land with relief in the atheist camp, for “balance”.
I read about that male University of Toronto professor who bragged that he only taught male, heterosexual authors and it struck me how neo-macho dudes are every bit as constricted by identity politics as any campus leftist. It must be so exhausting, constantly having to prove your bonafides, worrying whether liking a certain book will send the wrong message about you. Naturally these identities require one to signal membership through the consumption of various products, which allows hustlers like Driscoll to make obscene profits from male insecurity.
Alex, here’s the difference as I see it between Driscoll, MacDonald, et al and Meyers, Evans, Moore, etc. I don’t hear women marginalizing men. I’ve not heard any female teacher/preacher diminish the male “personhood” by elevating themselves to a position of importance to which the other is not entitled.
@ Headless Unicorn Guy:
So unicorn you are only offended with head patting if the wrong person does it. You are as partisan as the people about whom you complain if not more so.
As to Driscoll I reject his errant teachings and consider him am unfit teacher.
I read the link you posted, it reminds me of the way I was counciled in my marriage at CLC about 10 years ago. I was pretty much to blame. Maybe these guys blame women because they are getting away with it. And they do seem to be getting away with it. We need to do all we can to shine a light on this bullying.
I have a different view of Evans’ blog and books. I disagree with her discussion of the “texts of terror” without giving context for them. Wendy Alsup answered a couple of these and we quoted her on our blog.
In my crisis of faith over a decade ago, I, too, looked for, and found answers for many, yet not all, of these texts. As I have often said to those who ask, I find Christianity best answers the world that I see around me. But, it does not give ALL of the answers. We need to honestly deal with the questions it does not answer clearly.
I see Rachel Held Evans as a window into the voice of many of the younger people. I do not look to her for Biblical answers but I do look to her to hear what many are saying and thinking. I think that the vast majority of the younger generation thinks a lot like her. As opposed to being appalled, they are attracted by her writing.
When I read her, I ask myself-can I answer her questions or can I offer an alternative explanations that make sense? If truth be told, sometimes I cannot. The church has not done a good job of answering her, either. CBMW is not cutting it in the gender explanation.
So while we oldies putter along trying to define gender roles, this next group are asking different questions altogether. I look at Evans as one who raises questions and do not presume her to be a theologian just like I am not a theologian.
By the way, if one looks at the OT, women had to deal with a culture that viewed them as secondary members who could be discarded rather easily. So, when Esther was given to the king and the likes of Driscoll called her a slut, I realized just how bad a job the church has done in dealing with those difficult questions. Remember, the world hears Driscoll big mouth far more clearly than Wendy Alsup’s thoughtful explanations.
@ Joy Huff:
Yep, Driscoll, McDonald, CLC, Sovereign Grace etc.
They hold themselves up as the great spiritual superiors/authorities when all they spout is Adamic garbage like the first male.
Genesis 3:12 The man said, “The woman whom You gave to be with me, she gave me from the tree, and I ate.”
They are being men, all right. Fallen, fleshly, and walking squarely in the footsteps of Adam. They are not qualified to teach other men how to be like Jesus because they are NOT like Jesus. They are like Adam. And their manhood conferences idolize the fallen man rather than the second Adam, Jesus, who can to set things right.
I’m not doubting their salvation or sincerity. But I am greatly doubting their understanding of what being an actual follower of Christ means.
Dee and Deb are two well educated women with hearts of gold. They dig in, read as much as possible by and about the person or event/issue about which they write. And they allow anyone to comment, as long as they remain within some rules designed to prevent abuse of their readers. Among those who comment here are people who spent years with Driscoll. So get off your high horse, go read the entire blog, and then come back if your spittle still has any substance of truth to it.
Alex Guggenheim wrote:
No, he is simply calling out your tactics. Tactics that he has become quite familiar with.
Come here and make your arguments. No one here fears them. Leave you dismissive attitude at the door. We all see through them and they weaken your arguments rather than strengthen them.
Maybe you haven’t paid any attention but it is far from “my tactic” it was a device used by dee to me which I employed, hence her tactic. Duh. But of course that offends no one’s sensibilities, only my use.
The name for that is manufactured outrage.
Whose idea of Being a Man is “I CAN BEAT YOU UP! I CAN BEAT YOU UP!”
I keep wondering if he was a Beta to Omega male in high school, who found a way (through Christianese Celebrity) to become the Alpha Male for once (with Divine Right!) and is just throwing his weight around. “I’LL SHOW YOU! I’LL SHOW YOU!”
Driscoll seems pathologically insecure to me, with his obsessive fear of being viewed as a “chick.” What do Drisconians do if they are walking along and see a traveler who has been beaten and left for dead? Do they not only keep walking but look away in disgust while muttering under their breath “Wuss”? Compassion is for chicks and losers.
Thanks Patrice, you got there first!
Although I’d like to put out there to Alex that I consider Evans a far better scholar than Driscoll will ever be – that Esther debacle will live in my mind forever – you could at least have a dialogue with Evans about what you disagreed with & why. I have read her blog for a few years now & I massively appreciate her efforts to call out various teachers & preachers for bullying. Are you absolutely sure thst you don’t take her seriously because of issues of theology, rather than scholarship…i.e. you disagree with her theology so the scholarship that got her there, rather than to where you are, must be wrong?
So whether or not some marginalizes the other gender is the criterion for determining the damage others? They all damage integral theogy thus damaging believers in their own special way.
Again with the “you haven’t been paying attention” tactic.
Please argue the issues. Stop gas lighting, stop patronizing, stop deflecting, stop evading
Tell us what is wrong with our take on Driscoll and McDonald or go home.
I like to argue issues.
Seeing who is better at worthless tactics accomplishes nothing nor is sporting.
I am paying attention.
What I see so far is a guy trying to stir things up with shallow tactics.
Surprise me with a comment of substance. I like being surprised.
I like a good debate.
I hate wasting time with shallow arguers who don’t have a leg to stand on.
I dare you.
And I double dare you Alex.
Joan, I’m already a lost cause:
* Furry fan, which sends wrong messages called “bestiality” (and “uber homsoexual” thanks to the performance of some of the fandom’s higher-profile founders). Took an email harassment campaign on the former subject some years ago.
* And Brony; I have heard the drive-time radio coverage of Bronies, the “These grown MEN are into a Cartoon for SIX YEAR OLD GIRLS!” immediately followed by the stage whisper of “pedophiles…”.
This is really getting to the heart of the matter. Thanks, Mara.
Well Mara you didn’t pay attention or else you would not have accused me of a tactic you claim was mine when it was dee’s who used it as a device in responding to me and then I to her.
So either you own an acknowledgment and apology or you are a deliberate liar avoiding the truth. Why would I continue a discussion with you.
I do find much of this amusing, however.
The claimed purveyors of fairness and honesty can’t even bring themselves to acknowledge simple oversights…and you want people to pay attention to you on more serious matters?
When people claim they want to argue issues but become preoccupied with someone’s tactic which isn’t even their in the first place and then cannot admit their error when caught, that speaks for itself.
Evans may have a more appealing personality but scholarship wise, no, neither of them are worth being described in that sense.
Alex Guggenheim wrote:
I don’t quite see it that way, Alex. The teachings that marginalize women are directly intended toward that end. Those of Meyers, Evans, Moore albeit erroneous on some level are directed toward edifying, encouraging, strengthening the hearers. The intent is the difference.
(Haven’t read all the comments…)
I don’t know if anyone else posted this, but the first person I thought of when I saw this in my FB feed was Mark Driscoll.
Alex- I suppose the question is whether it is an oversight? Or whether Dee & Debs have been concentrating on the larger, rather than the smaller issues? No-one who regularly reads here believes that the only ones getting it wrong are men. There are some amazing examples of repeat offenders they have focused on, for just those reasons, rather than gender. If a woman preacher was being as outrageous as any one of those guys they’d get plenty of press here. Why not suggest some topics to help bring balance, if you perceive it as lacking? I’m pretty sure D & D are equal opportunity criticisers.
I once remember being amazed when a friend called off a discussion about God he was having with a very enthusiastic guy. When I asked why, he told me that the other guy just wanted to argue, he didn’t want to know.
Alex Guggenheim wrote:
Please elucidate – this is not exactly an enlightening answer.
Yes, these guys blame women, I’ve thought for a long time now that this is just plain worldliness, and sinfulness, that they are acting out.
Alex, you failed to surprise me.
Just more of the same.
I set forth two arguments against a couple of your comments long before I ever brought up tactics.
You never touched them. You were working too hard trying to baffle us with your B.S. tactics to be troubled with dealing with issues.
You are in over your head.
You found out the people here know what they are talking about way more than you. But rather than engage in anything fruitful…
Yeah. More of the same.
I’m not surprised.
I may or may not enter into further conversation with you. It depends a lot on whether you want to engage in issues or engage in tactics.
@ Joy Huff:
Joy, here is one of my favorite passages in the Bible.
16 But to the wicked God says,
“What right have you to tell of My statutes
And to take My covenant in your mouth?
17 “For you hate discipline,
And you cast My words behind you.
18 “When you see a thief, you [g]are pleased with him,
And you associate with adulterers.
19 “You let your mouth loose in evil
And your tongue frames deceit.
20 “You sit and speak against your brother;
You slander your own mother’s son.
21 “These things you have done and I kept silence;
You thought that I was just like you;
I will reprove you and state the case in order before your eyes.
Actually, It’s verse 21 that is my favorite.
It illustrates the weakness in people to believe that whatever they think is okay must be okay because they think that God thinks the way they do.
They (okay we all) often forget that His ways are higher than ours.
Men defraud women of their position in Christ and even justice in dealing with men because they thing God thinks about women the way men do.
I say this with fear and trembling.
It is something WE ALL have to watch out for. We have to all keep going back to God and the Cross and ask God how he views things.
I just think it’s harder for those in authority. They think they must be in authority because they are somehow “better”. Then it’s easy for them to think that they understand God better.
When you’ve watched the history of men repeat itself over and over and over, it gets so glaringly obvious and tiresome (as opposed to winsome).
I need to learn to Reply w/Quote, but I can’t figure it out. You said. So while we oldies putter along trying to define gender roles, this next group are asking different questions all togeather. That’s what I see, too. My two daughters-in-law are wonderful women, I love and respect them, but if my sons came along and said “woman obey me” or anthing like that,I think they would be picking themselves up off the floor(sons). 🙂
This reminds me, one of those sons, we he was about 3 years old, loved to stand in front of the TV, untill everyone reacted to him. I got to the point where I said “lets just ignore him” so we did and after a while he stopped. This might be something to to apply in response to some posts that may be annoying:-).
Joy Huff wrote:
To be honest, I don’t really have a framework for the “tough guy blue collar male” teachings being punted round. My wife is intelligent, beautiful, and kind. I am always humbled by her. I can’t even imagine “subjugating” or even “subordinating” her. She is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh. I love her like my own body (somewhere I think there is Scripture about this). This is the only marriage I know, and the hyper “masculine” MMA husband trope just doesn’t make sense to me. I doubt it would make any sense to her, either.
I laughed so hard. I don’t understand how people can be so blind.
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
This attitude has always made me very uncomfortable. I wrestled in college and have studied martial arts for years. I literally can beat up most folks. Which would be the greatest evil and misuse of my God given talents, to lash out at the image of God in man like that (wrestling is awesome; it protects the combatants. I despise MMA, however).
You see the root of this kind of thinking is a lack of responsibility in using power. It is an ancient (pagan) trope in which those with power use it to climb over the bodies of those less empowered – we see it in Hollywood blockbuster action flicks; we see it in Wall Street tactics; we see it in Breaking Bad. We also saw it in ancient Israel and Rome, and Jesus went out of his way to turn this on his head. The one who could call down a thousand angels robed himself with a towel and washed the disciples feet.
What is so ironic is that far from rejecting this attitude, some “bible” teachers have debased it. At least Wall Street tycoons are using sophisticated algorithms and brain power to subjugate people. Here we have an attitude that the real mark of masculinity is physical strength and brute force. It is not only clinging to the same error; it is a devolution of the civic mind.
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
fwiw, My Little Pony, Friendship is Magic is one of the best written television shows in history. Regardless of intended audience, it was truly a work of excellence.
This happened the last time you were here. You made comments that were difficult and then you blamed everyone else for not understanding your obviously cogent comments. This is a warning. Up your game. Now.
Did that old guy with the chin hair actually use “real men” and “endangered species” in the same sentence? Now why would he do that? We have lots of real men around here where I live. Either the old guy is directly distorting the truth, or else he rarely comes into contact with real men, I suppose, because real men don’t flock to his church. Or else, maybe he would not actually know a real man if he met one.
Every time I look at some of these guys I am reminded that leather gets grimy and greasy and dries and cracks and is stiff and uncomfortable. And facial hair itches. So does a real man have to neglect personal hygiene in pursuit of swagger and ballyhoo? Pitiful.
The other thing is: when these flocks of men go off by themselves to manly men conferences, what do they do in their spare time? Does anybody have a record of what economic impact these gatherings have on the barely legal or even illegal after hours darker aspects of the cities where they meet? What better way to hide activities you would not do in your home town, or want the family to know about, than to go to a “christian” conference on manliness.
Hey, you want to be a real man? Hold a job. build a business, keep your family together, fight a war, manage a budget, stay in school, serve on the city council, visit the old folks home, jerk a knot in your teenager, cut some of your old buddies loose, cut the grass, get a flu shot, tell your wife she is still hot, teach a kid to read, sit up all night in the hospital with a dying friend, etc.
But it is not about leather or hair or tattoos-for-Jesus.
Joy Huff wrote:
Just highlight the part of the comment you want and hit reply with quote.
As for the part of your comment that I quoted, let me channel Johnny Cash “You’ve been reading my mail.”
I agree with the opinion that Mark Driscoll and others like him have stunted brains regarding gender.
They are twisting the scripture of 1Corinthians to say Be a Man. Taken in context with a simple study of the original word used for man says to anyone male or female to ACT like strong man. If you want to add words to the Bible, you could better add Act like a real person, not a mouse. Paul even says it in the context of submitting to ALL who are laboring with him. So you could add words like act like a man and submit to Priscilla. But you can’t twist Paul’s words to say that it says BE a man. A woman can just as well ‘man up’ when pushing out a baby. I just watched WWZ the movie and Brad Pitt has to tell a woman to ‘gut up!’. Paul means it like that.
Bene D wrote:
Bene D, it might be said that the Crisis of Conference Christians was so very 2011 and we’re in 2013 now.
@ Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist:
Just the fact that Lauren Faust and Tara Strong joined the project was enough to make me give the show a shot. Been borrowing season 1 for a while now and have been enjoying the series.
And probably more leap straight over to the likes of Evans after being thrown under Driscoll’s bus, than the other way.
At the bottom of the “Conference Gear” page is a small photo of Mark Driscoll, and about four squares over is a photo of a bus with the text “Fill the Bus.”
That is all kinds of ironic and strange, if you will recall this:
Mark Driscoll – There is a pile of dead bodies behind the Mars Hill bus, and Driscoll thinks that is great.
Based on that audio, Driscoll thinks the more people he kicks out, ostracizes, from his church, to get things done 100% his way, the better. So of course that bus probably needs to be filled again.
From the OP (original post),
But I feel that way about preachers selling merchandise for or about anything. The TV preachers are pretty bad about this, with selling books and DVDs.
Jim Bakker has his own show again, where he is selling dried blueberries to people that they can eat when the Anti-Christ rules America and closes all the Kroger’s.
I mentioned it before on an older thread, but it grates on my nerves the way preachers/churches commercialize Christianity, especially when the preacher claims his books explain something – a concept – that is already in the Bible.
If your concept in the Bible, I can read it there for free for myself, I don’t need to buy your $15 – $80 book/ DVD package that explains it.
Even cheesier are the T-shirt, plaques, ball caps, etc, not just from churches/ preachers, but stuff like Christian films do the same thing.
When the church-produced “Courageous” movie was released, all sorts of Courageous-related cheese was sold along with it, including $50-$60 wooden plaques with the movie’s pledge thing written on it for people to hang in their homes. 🙄
I’m still trying to watch the videos that Deb and Dee posted, but the top one is taking forever to download.
Bravo! Well said, Nancy!
😆 Promise Keepers 2013 Conference for (He)men, “Awakening the Warrior” 😆 Oh geeze!
Okay, I’ll awaken my inner warrior, like Xena Warrior Princess. Women can be warriors too. (The Old Testament mentions Deborah and Jael, specifically.)
Alex Guggenheim wrote:
I think this blog took Moore to task a long time ago for her something.
Maybe one reason for the focus on the males teaching this stuff is that I don’t see as many females harping on “manhood,” “how to be a man,” and trying to define for other people what “biblical manhood” is.
About the only time we see women yakking about “womanhood” is vis a vis the male headed groups pushing this stuff, such as “Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood.”
As to the rest of the names in your list. I don’t agree with most of Joyce Meyer’s teachings (she is Word of Faith), and I agree with RHE on a few things, but not all.
Just because someone spends more time on a blog pointing out areas of disagreement with one topic, or segment of Christian culture, does not necessarily mean they’re hunky dory with all the rest.
I’m not sure where you, Alex G, stand on gender roles and what not, but I always find it irritating when a Christian male harps on the errors being taught by female preachers and mentions over and over they are FEMALE, since they say female preachers are not permitted in the Bible, yet even as they criticize theological error by male preachers (such as Benny Hinn or whomever), they don’t stop to point out the guy’s gender.
As much as I enjoy the “Fighting for the Faith” podcast, how it grates on my nerves when the anti-female preacher host (who is a man) only points out the gender of the one he is critiquing if it’s a female.
I am using him as an example, but I see other male Christians do the same thing.
Why not just judge their sermons on its own merits and leave the gender out of it?
The male host I’m speaking of never mentions that Heath Mooneyham is a man when he critiques Mooneyham’s dodgy sermons.
The male podcast host never mentions Driscoll’s gender when critiquing Driscoll sermons, or any of the other male preachers he critiques.
It’s like the male host (and males such as him) think maleness in and of itself makes a male immune from teaching or believing in theological/doctrinal error, but it does not.
I think this goes back to their warped view that women are supposedly more easily deceived than men, since Eve ate the forbidden fruit. Men have been teaching error since the start of Christianity, when Paul had to confront Peter to his face for supporting error.
“Since Driscoll, MacDonald and gang have copyrighted the conference name – © 2013 Act Like Men – I wondered whether anyone else had used that phrase (besides Almighty God, of course!)”
For the record, copyright does not apply to names or titles of works (though such can be trademarked). So I’m not sure what’s up with that.
Alex Guggenheim wrote:
It’s their blog; they can focus on whatever they wish to focus on.
If you are so keen on pointing out error taught by female leaders, you can set up your own blog and blog away. (You can start a blog for free.)
Since women are not given much voice in Christian circles – many churches and Christian groups bar women from preaching, teaching, leading – I think it only fitting that the males get the brunt of criticism.
There are other sites, Christian apologetic sites, that expose things such as WoF heresy, and you can find many articles about female teachers and leaders examined on their sites.
On occasion, I post at RHE’s blog, and I sometimes speak up and disagree with her or her readers. You can do the same thing. You can post comments on RHE’s blog if she says something you disagree with. As long as you keep it respectful, she will allow those sorts of posts on her blog.
A lot of the stuff I’m seeing in Christianity and how lots of Christians behave, coupled with a few personal crises in my life the last few years, have caused me to have one foot planted in Agnostic Land, and the other is still barely in Christianity.
This after years and years of being a goody goody, conservative Christian (I accepted Jesus as Savior as a kid) who was into apologetics for years, studying the history of the Bible (how the Bible came to us today) etc.
How Christians behave (do they walk the walk, do they practice what they preach, or are they more or less hypocrites most of the time), and how they treat other people, can impact whether or not people stay in the faith or walk away. I know that’s true in my case, and I’ve talked to other people for whom it’s been true.
You can have correct doctrine all day long, but if you are also treating other people like trash consistently, it really makes me wonder if the faith is so true after all, or worth while.
MacDonald talking about doctrine is a joke when I recall how he and Driscoll practically drooled all over T.D. Jakes when the latter visited their Elephant Room show. Driscoll could hardly believe it when Jakes deigned to have dinner with him. In the presence of a more “powerful” male, they folded, barely scratching the surface of Jakes’ trinitarian heresy, and not mentioning at all his health and wealth “gospel.” The same with John Piper hosting Rick Warren. I’ll begin to see them as real men when they show half the courage in confronting false or compromising teachers that Charles Spurgeon did when he engaged them in his time.
Janet Mefferd recently interviewed an author about this, or topics closely related:
Hour 3- Janet talks with Prof. Jerram Barrs about his book ‘Delighting in the Law of the Lord’ (audio interview)
@ Alex Guggenheim: Alex, you seem to be in full attack mode whenever you comment here, ditto for other blogs (I’ve seen recent comments by you at iMonk).
I think you come here *looking* to get into flamer wars, and nobody’s obliging you.
It would be cool if you could chill out a bit and just read and *converse* with people here, but at this point, it doesn’t seem to be your goal.
@ numo: Err, “flame,” not “flamer.”
I’m down the street from Copps Coliseum, and I can’t believe they could get 19 000 people in there, although they might have come close when KISS played there… I heard this promoted from the pulpit and it bothered but did not surprise me. when the guy who was promoting it first arrived, the first thing I saw him do was cause pain to a parishoner who stood in the way of his ‘vision.’
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
My Little Brony Toy Commercial – CollegeHumor Video
Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:
I wish you’d write a post or essay on MMA, because you have the know-how to do it. As an observer (very interested in tai chi and some of the various Chinese weapons practices – especially straight sword), it seems to me that deliberately hurting people is the absolute antithesis of what true martial arts are about.
MMA seems like a real-life version of “The Fight Club” to me, and I wish the words “martial arts” were NOT in its name.
That’s a good idea.
When I was new here and mentioned how adult singles (and the childless) get treated like second class citizens in Christianity (marriage is considered the norm among many Christians/ churches), Deb and Dee did several posts highlighting this very thing, which I thought was very nice of them.
(And it is a real problem. The emphasis on marriage and child rearing causes a lot of older singles to drop out of church, as well as childless married couples)
So, maybe Alex could post (or e mail) with asking if there could be a post here discussing aberrant theology of female teachers or female Christian commentators?
Especially if he could maybe explain how it fits some of the common interests of this blog, how such female leaders are damaging the body of Christ, or if any of their teaching aids in hurting people or in covering up abuse, etc?
Yes! And the Proverbs 31 passage uses the same word for finding a virtuous woman as the Bible does to describe Gideon, man of valor same as woman of valor. The biased writers just couldn’t bring themselves to describe a strong woman as desirable.
But then again John Piper likes ’em, he just warns that the intimacy from that attraction might be rough and without nice walks on the beach first.
Wow. (off topic, but wow)
Pastor Shot, Killed During La. Church Service
Alex Guggenheim wrote:
I would love to count. Name some women who have big followings besides Moore and Meyer. Evans is pretty much a blogger/entertainment and has a large male following.
And I have always been a bit astonished at how many men comment here. Since surf alot on YRR pastor blogs and their movement sites, there are few women commenting there. Considering what I have seen, the amount of men who comment here is really astonishing to.
Guess it is all in how one looks at it and their experiences.
So give us some big female names who have masses of young women following them. I would love to know about them. Give us the female eqivalent to Driscoll. Or the female Mahaney. Female Mohler?
Does … Paula White not count?
I watch lots of Christian networks, even though I disagree with about 95% of the content I hear/see, and based on the Christian blogs and sites I visit, I don’t know of too many big name female Christian leaders/ teachers.
Off the top of my head, the big ones are Beth Moore and Joyce Meyer; Paula White is kinda sorta big, but doesn’t seem to be as popular as the first two ladies.
There’s a blond Aussie woman who is sometimes a guest on Christian shows such as “Life Today.” She’s talked about her childhood abuse and how she helps kids stuck in child trafficking.
There’s an older single Christian lady who is a singer who gets interviewed on that same show on occasion. Kathy Troccoli.
There’s the ex host of 700 Club, who has a Scottish accent. She’s interviewed every so often on these shows, and goes on conference circuits for women.
Most of the other women, when they are allowed to speak during church shows, are the wives – such as John Hagee’s wife, she does the annual Mother’s Day speech thing.
There’s Taffi Dollar (wife of preacher who is allowed to address the church’s congregation/TV show) every so often.
Anne Graham, daughter of Billy Graham, occasionally cranks out a book or interview.
TBN owner Paul Crouch Sr wife, Jann. She sometimes gets her own 30 minute spots on TBN.
The only other major figure (female) I can think of is that Charismatic lady who had her own show or something in the 1970s or so. She gets referenced a lot on TBN, by WoF males with approval. Kathryn Kuhlman.
After Billy Joe Daugherty died a few years ago, his wife took over preaching at their church (Tulsa, Okla). Their church has a weekly TV show.
There really aren’t too many hugely, influential female figures in Christendom, not like the male preachers who have the big selling books, huge memberships, etc.
Joyce Meyers believes in and teachers gender complementarianism.
I’ve seen many of her TV shows, and she has on several of them, told women that their husbands are the heads, to submit to your husband, etc.
I figured long ago that Driscoll’s Christian Celebrity career was going to end in some sort of sex scandal. Don’t know much about MacDonald, though.
Kathryn Kuhlman dates back to the Sixties. I remember Ruth Buzzi doing a parody of her on Rowan & Martin’s Laugh-In. The act was “what if KK used her public-speaking style and mannerisms all the time, no matter how inappropriate?” And KK herself sent Laugh-In a fan letter about it, saying she got a laugh out of them spoofing her.
(Hmmm…. I wonder what sort of fan letter Driscoll or MacDonald or the other Celebrity Preacher types (or their lawyers/armorbearers) would send to a comedy revue that spoofed them?)
I am sure she “counts” but not sure how. Does she have a church planting network training thousands of little Paula Whites on her personal doctrinal interpretations starting churches all over the place? What is her following? I know little about her.
Anyone know of any women who are the President of a seminary?
Some years ago, I remember an online essay where some preacher who was also a retired MMA cage fighter (after his third concussion he figured he’d quit while he was still ahead) did an analysis of Driscoll’s MMA “thing”.
He concluded that Driscoll was the worst type of MMA fanboy, the type who went to the matches just to see people get hurt and imagine himself doing the hurting vicariously. (“ME TOUGH GUY! JUST LIKE THEM!”) The main tipoff was Driscoll going on about “Just Me and Him In the Cage/Ring”, completely ignoring the network of trainers and sparring partners supporting the fighters. And also ignoring the fact that once a cage fighter acknowledges defeat by “tapping out”, the winning fighter IMMEDIATELY stops his attack.
@ Headless Unicorn Guy:
If there were a Driscoll sex scandal who would know if the other party stayed silent? He got rid of most of his elders. Down to 3 yes men now, I think?
I do wonder about his violent tendencies. That might be where it ends up. As far as I am concerned he has already imploded it is just that not enough people care. I read recently they are no longer publishing numbers. I know that is always a sign they are dwindling. Now, it takes a while for the high numbers to dwindle. But keep in mind for a mega church losing a few thousand is a disaster financially.
Sounds like “Caveman”-style Rape Culture.
Alex Guggenheim wrote:
First, as has already been pointed out, TWW hasn’t been silent on the other side.
Second, your whole complaint seems to be that TWW doesn’t meet some male/female topic ratio you have in mind. But when the topic is spiritual abuse and gospels of oppression and harm being done to people in the name of God, and the overwhelming majority of these ‘ministers’ are male, you’re going to end up with more men as subjects than women- simple math.
ANIMAL Dominance Display, Dom and Sub, Top and Bottom. Just like every scene in Left Behind (according to Slacktivist) when both LaHaye & Jenkins’ author self-inserts are onstage together.
The only exceptions I’ve heard attempted were by fanboy amateurs who did NOT understand copyright and thought it meant that “*I* Came Up With It, IT’S MINE MINE MINE! ALL OF IT!” I had to deal with one years ago when a joint shared-universe writing project went sour. (He dithered about what a Great Author he was — you can see the warning sign — I actually wrote and got some fanzine pubs, and he called Copyright Jihad on me. Bad Craziness.)
Now THAT’s cheezy. But then fanboys have no sales resistance, even to the most ridiculous souvenir shlock. If I had to pay $50 and up for some movie or TV show tie-in merch, I’d make sure I got my money’s worth. Maybe something custom or original.
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
This is what you’re talking about. I’m acquainted with Matt, he’s a very nice guy.
Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:
Doc, you don’t know the half of it. I’m old enough to remember Star Trek and Star Wars fandom (the first when I was in jr high, the second while in college and immediately afterwards), and I have NEVER seen the sheer volume of fan-made creative output as I have in Bronydom. Art, comics, writing, sculpture, YouTube animations (both stock footage mash-ups and original Flash shorts; some of the latter has actually been mistaken for genuine show material), original music, you name it. Right next to me as I type this is a hardback copy of the famous pony fanfic novel Past Sins, pubbed by a subscription-only small press and done as a quality hardback (with illustrations and fanart appendices). I may be at the author’s launch party next week and will be getting my copies signed (including two for my writing partners, both Bronies, who couldn’t afford a copy). The amount of creative output you find in this fandom is just incredible.
And it does beg another question: How can Bronies pull off so much quality creative work compared to Christianese cheeze? How can a 22-year-old lapsed Lutheran grad student write a novel (Past Sins) REDEEMING a pony Antichrist while all these Men-o-Gawd spit venom “Acting Like Men” and denouncing to Eternal Hell?
THAT’S THE ONE!
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
We were in seminary at the same time. He’s a pastor now. 🙂
Don’t forget Gail Riplinger…
Ok, I may have spent too much time submerged in fundamentalist Baptist purgatory in the past. Fundies are like other cultic subcultures. They think their leaders are hot stuff, but the rest of the world hasn’t heard of them. It comforts me that, when I get outside of my conservative evangelical bubble, it’s rare that I find a Christian who’s heard of Driscoll et. al.
Whenever I see a Driscoll video I see him as a combination of Biff in Back to the Future and Johnny “Sweep the Leg” Lawrence in Karate Kid
@ Headless Unicorn Guy:
I just looked it up, and that Courageous plaque is still for sale on several sites.
It’s originally over $80 on one site, but they have placed it on sale for around $40.
There’s even a video off to the right of that page I linked to about the plaque, showing some guy with his family hanging it up. 🙄 I just watched that video. It has scenes from the movie and dramatic music.
I wish Christians would stop commercializing everything so much. It makes the whole faith look cheap.
If you’re going to do a Christian film or book, fine, but please, lay off the tie in merchandise, such as ball caps, T shirts with the film’s logo, etc.
IMO, the only exception for this would be Christian kiddie films. I can see a kid wanting a stuffed Aslan lion toy doll, or what not. But adults don’t really need the plaques and posters.
I only know who Gail the Ripper is from having spent a long time (many years ago) being insulted by AV1611’s online telling me I was going to Heck for using a NIV per-version. I doubt many other Christians know who Gail is. She is part of a very, very narrow Christian sub-culture.
I agree. I like Rachel Held Evans. Her scholarship is much more solid than, for eg, John Piper’s. And Piper is better than Driscoll/MacDonald. All these guys, however, live in the Masculine Mystique Mylar Hot-Air Balloon, and they float.
I’d like to see them brought back down to earth.
@ JeffT: “Biff” Driscoll. It has play.
Well, as actual scholarship goes I vastly prefer Susan R Garrett to either Driscoll or Evans. Her books on diabology in the synoptics are worthy reads.
Yes. I am fairly sure that you will end up agnostic if you look at organized Christianity to prove/disprove a loving god. I would have done so. I hope that doesn’t happen for you, Daisy.
God is amazing and completely apart from much that goes on in His/Her name. I fear for these people because when things are finally sorted out, they are going to be in deep %^#* for so cheaply misusing God.
Diabology, what a fine word! It seems to me that Evans is a practical theologian, more like a pastor, really, rather than an academic. As such, she is very effective.
I will check out Garrett on diabology in the synoptics. Sounds fascinating.
Just a random thought:
Women are only kept out of the pulpit in SOME denominations. Women only fair poorly in SOME seminaries.
Now why on earth, if one is female, would one pass by the seminaries and denominations that welcome you, choose one that doesn’t, and then cry foul?
Sort of the same as choosing a Baptist church and then crying foul that they don’t celebrate the Mass.
Anyone know anything about her? I have heard a short clip of here teaching where she was exegeting the Hebrew in a passage. Have no idea what her views are.
Maybe we can add her in for Alex’s quota?
I write from a Southern Baptist and evangelical background, and I am familiar with fundies, all of whom are not generally female friendly.
@ Patrice: I would characterize her as a writer/journalist with a very deep interest in xtianity, Judaism, and the bible – not so much as a “scholar” per se. (Am sure she’d agree.) But she *does* investigate things pretty thoroughly.
I like her work.
Just for kicks, I went to RHE’s website, and writer/speaker is exactly how she describes herself. I appreciate her writings as well.
Well Linda, It took some time for some females to realize they really were not welcome in some programs of study anymore. SBTS comes to mind and what happened there in the 90’s. SWBTS, too as with Sheri Klouda.
This made me laugh! Driscoll is a total ’80s teen movie faux-tough guy. It’s amazing that he leads a church when he comes across like he’d rather be taking down Ralph Macchio in the big tournament (by fighting dirty, of course).
Can someone send Mr. Miyagi to Mars Hill?
Patrice, The Demise of the Devil and The Temptation of Jesus in Mark’s Gospel are the titles as best I can recall them off the top of my head. The Wittenburg Door had an interesting interview with her in the 1990s, I think. She does a good job explaining the role intertestamental literature played in informing how synoptic authors approached diabology and why more modern Western scholars would do well to not downplay that aspect in early Christian writings.
Anon 1 wrote:
Anon1 — Melissa Scott is the widow of Gene Scott. You can check out Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_Scott. Here as well: http://www.drgenescott.org/
“WE ALL FLOAT HERE!” — Pennywise
Yes, that is a very good observation. MMA and other “beat you to a bloody pulp” activities flies in the face of all the martial training I have received.
The problem is they create enough hot air to keep themselves afloat. Might need to send an arrow into the balloon.
Johnny Cash? I thought those words were from Kris Kristoffersen’s “To beat the devil”?
@ Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist: thanks. I also hate the name “mixed martial arts.” when I 1st ehard it, I thought it was some kind of competitive wushu thing… was I ever wrong!!!
well, depends on how “martial” the martial art really is. All martial arts have as their ultimate goal killing people. That’s why they’re called martial arts in terms of history and origin. Those high kicks were developed to counter adversaries who had the advantage of being on horseback. Kick them off the steed and the battle is literally leveled. So a lot depends on what is meant by MA and how it’s approached.
Not that the critique of Driscoll’s understanding (such as it is) of martial arts isn’t worth repeating. Comparable levels of physical discipline could be found in, say, ballet, right? 🙂 Rite of Spring turned 100 this year and I couldn’t afford to hit any centennial stagings.
Ok, one last comment on “fight club” Christianity. It is interesting that Chuck Palahniuk recognizes that the oedipus complex evinced by his protagonist springs from a rejection of God and human value. The following quotes are from the movie (couldn’t find book quotes, but I read the book and while these exact quotes weren’t in the book, the attitudes were):
You’re not your job. You’re not how much money you have in the bank. You’re not the car you drive. You’re not the contents of your wallet. You’re not your f*cking khakis. You’re the all-singing, all-dancing crap of the world.
Our fathers were our models for God. If our fathers bailed, what does that tell you about God?
Listen to me! You have to consider the possibility that God does not like you. He never wanted you. In all probability, he hates you. This is not the worst thing that can happen. We don’t need him!
F*ck damnation, man! F*ck redemption! We are God’s unwanted children? So be it!”
It is Tyler Durden’s rejection of God and human value that led to Fight Club. There is a reason for that.
“…remember food, housing, transportation and conference gear are (in all likelihood) NOT included.”
Well, real men sleep on the ground under the stars and ride in on a horse.
These kinds of conferences are simply ridiculous and asinine. I’m sure I’m a failure in their eyes because no one ever taught me how to be a godly/biblical/gopelly manly man. What I was taught was how to be a faithful person and follower of Jesus. My gender was decidedly secondary. Of course, at that time no one had yet thought to drum up a perceived need for these types of conferences, or about the money to be made from them.
Want to be a great man? Then be a great person. Do justly, love mercy, and walk humbly with your God. Love the Lord with all your heart and mind and soul and strength. Follow Jesus. Not to say it’s easy, but it ain’t rocket science and I sure don’t need a conference with macho jerk pastors to clue me in about it.
Sorry, but this kind of schlock dressed up as spiritual superiority just makes me want to gag.
@ WenatcheeTheHatchet: Have you ever practiced any of the martial arts? They really have a great deal to do with finesse, controlled movement and the redirection of energy (by which I mean redirecting an opponent’s attacking force away from oneself and back onto the opponent), as well as with blocking. Combat on horseback or as an infantry soldier is *not* the same thing as what’s meant to be achieved in the classic Chinese martial arts (includes various forms of tai chi, btw).
I don’t know enough about Japanese or Korean martial arts to be able to comment on those.
@ WenatcheeTheHatchet: Besides, MMA comes from very different roots – from kickboxing to “vale tudo” (very roughly rendered into English as “no holds barred”) Brazilian jiu jitsu matches to… well. Chinese martial arts it ain’t; even Japanese and Okinawan (and likely Korean), ditto.
It’s a brutal “sport” that has stolen the term “martial arts” from the legit field and is using it as marketing.
Definitely for Fight club fanboys, not true martial artists.
Anon 1 wrote:
She’s Dr. Gene Scott’s widow…
1 Cor 13 comes to mind.
Alex Guggenheim wrote:
Brilliant analysis. I too have noticed once he preaches the Bible, he gets it all wrong, or, assumes his audience can’t read. Here is an example so no one accuses me of unfounded criticism.
The video, which I can’t find right now, starts off with him saying women get the bible wrong, they think they have to submit to men. He explains he has a daughter and that as a Dad, that would not be a good idea. He then tells everyone the Bible says women are only to submit to their husbands. The audience is now nodding in agreement and I am sitting there going ” Or you completely ignorant, or do you feel your audience is??? it says all believers are to submit to one another” (Ephesians 5:21). I can’t recall, but he may, at this point, have not even quoted a verse yet, so his comment couldn’t be excused as coming from a different verse.
He is appealing, if you believe submission = following someone else, but that verse is a strong argument that Paul did not view submission as following a leader, rather as honouring (Canadian spelling or my spell check changes it for me) others. Both those meanings were used for the word we translate ‘submit’ and that verse seems to back up the ‘honouring’ verse. Mind you, Driscoll brags about not doing Greek word studies, so this point would be lost on him.
Anyways, I totally agree Mara, over and over again I have heard him misquote scripture, and not teach what the Bible really says – esp. on the Song of Songs (and turing the verse about the beloved thinking her lover tasted sweet to a command for wives to give their husbands oral sex was so stupid I just about threw the computer across the room) – yes, the SoS is a check list for mandatory sex acts in marriage – and a rule book about how married people must live – in which case, where is Driscoll’s Calvary? as the SoS has the lover riding out with his 60 strong calvary to meet his beloved therefore the Bible clearly teaches all husbands need to ride out with a calvary to go take their brides to their wedding ceremony, and you can’t argue with the Bible… it is right there in the law of marriage book, oops, I mean the Song of Songs, seriously the SoS means wives better start demanding a lot more from their husbands (Calvarys, choirs, Cedar post-and-beam houses, a silver carriage, a vineyard and a crown) if that is the direction he is taking it.
Nothing like turning poetry into law to show what a brilliant Bible teacher you are.
I’d also like to add that TWW has, of course, critiqued Nancy Leigh DeMoss and Mary Kassian. And someone remind me if the Botkin sisters have been “officially” mentioned here? Though all these women could easily be interpreted as mouthpieces for men instead of teachers in their own right.
I do have to admit that I am sorely tempted to watch some My Little Pony and see what all the fuss is about. It’s all your fault. 😉
@ Steve Scott:
…and are swift as a coursing river; with all the force of a great typhoon; with all the strength of a raging fire; and are mysterious as the dark side of the moon!
Of course these same guys later infiltrate the emperor’s palace by crossdressing.
And let's not forget our numerous posts on homemaker extraordinaire – Dorothy Patterson.
Steve Scott wrote:
Well, seriously, some of them actually do just that.
But here is the thing. The folks who are into camping and backpacking and even extreme wilderness survival are not going around threatening to beat people up.
The NRA people and the high tech bow hunters and the people who are into competitive sharpshooter skills are not threatening to harm the populace.
The martial arts people (and one of my granddaughters is a black belt in TaeKwonDo) are not a menace to society but are, rather, athletes, some at the Olympic level. Side comment: good for you Dr Fundystan et al.
So what the blip do these belligerent so-called christians, alleged followers of the “real man” who set his face toward Jerusalem to walk straight into his own death think they are doing? It looks like the bluster and posturing that sometimes betray an inner fear, as when the weaker species in nature use display and threat against a stronger opponent. However, when fear is not due to a real and immediate threat but is rather a personality/character trait, I believe we call that cowardice. And cowardice is the life blood of some bullies, and that is surely what it looks like.
“God is amazing and completely apart from much that goes on in His/Her name. I fear for these people because when things are finally sorted out, they are going to be in deep %^#* for so cheaply misusing God.”
Yes, this is true. The professional Christian rat pack / brat pack carries itself like they believe they are God’s executive board members (among the very few elite who are allowed in to the EXECutive Breakfast Lounge). Kind of cute and silly, like the video I took of my son role playing with his mighty action figures while he was supposed to be taking a nap (noises & all).
Spending time out of the cultural valley and at a higher cleaner altitude makes this very easy to see.
Hugh Grant, Stephen Fry illustrate this pretty well: “A Bit of Fry and Laurie – “You Can’t Make an Omelette Without Breaking Eggs”: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKcNB3hKG7Y
Steve Scott wrote:
Is this the origin of the expression “You and the horse you rode in on!”?
Or should it be an application with these guys?
So they are in no danger from a Zombie Apocalypse?
Dramatic music and all?
Now that’s just double-cheezy.
Please tell me that was a fanboy production and not an official plug.
Retha Faurie wrote:
In my opinion Kristofferson’s works are top-notch. Few artists have the uncanny knack with words that he has. My favorite is his album Surreal Thing. Even the album title is subtle word play when you look close enough.
How much ya wanna bet though that if the oral eroticism went the other way he’d cherry pick stuff out of Leviticus, spin it, and try to show how it’s somehow unclean and forbidden?
Let’s just face it and call it out for what it is, women have a primal power that these guys fear and loathe.
Me too. Men who constantly have to tell everybody how manly they are, aren’t.
Awwww Hester…..after seeing all the young people being scooped up by the Driscoll Satellite here in my town you are such a breath of fresh hope for your generation IMO.
I know we have covered this Driscoll stuff already but oh how angry I get at Mark Driscoll’s twisted scripture and IMO stupid interpretations and sometimes I think he may just be outright lying and that is why he won’t actually read the scripture he is referring to in many of his sermons. For example, he said that oral se.. and other acts are necessarry for a wife to keep their husbands faithful just as SOS teaches to do. HA! When Solomon was pursuing the Shulamite girl he already had 60 women and how many does the Bible say he eventually ended up with??? Um ya, it worked out real well for that Shulamite bride, if indeed she did marry him. I like the interpretation of SOS as actually a love triangle. I think there are two men in the book, the king and the shepherd. I think she rejected the wooing of the rich sexy king and married her true love, the shepherd.
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
It appears professionally made.
Sorry I left the link out of my original post.
The video is on the right hand side of this page, under the “Videos about this item” heading (you can see a guy in a red shirt hanging the plaque up on the wall in the video’s preview image, while his 1954 Nuclear Family looks on approvingly):
Courageous – The Resolution FOR MEN – 14×24 Personalized Framed Print with Family Picture
It contains bold, large text slamming on the screen with overly dramatic music.
Kind of like those hokey local news reports where the graphic artist over- dramatizes weather updates…
Where there’s an every day rain shower coming up, but they put “DEADLY WEATHER!!!” in all caps on the screen with overblown graphics of large lightning flashes, etc.
Muff Potter wrote:
What I don’t understand about the Mark Driscolls of the world is why they are so hung up on male sexual pleasure. I can’t think of any of them addressing how women want to be treated in the bedroom.
When preachers discuss these subjects, they only tell the husbands that women like to talk and think about sunsets, as though all women are asexual, totally disinterested in this, and don’t have needs in that area, or preferences. It’s all about how the women can meet the menfolk’s needs, never the reverse.
And what about on occasions where either partner is not in the mood? I’ve not heard a preacher tell husbands, ‘and if your wife is not in the mood, back off, you can survive a week/ month/ year without sex you big whiny cry baby.’
(And some women may need to hear that: there are men who for whatever reason don’t want to have sex, or have medical problems, are under job stress etc)
I have only ever heard preachers lecture women on why and how they should perform, even though they may be under stress, tired, sick, just don’t want to, etc.
I used to listen to Milissa Scott years ago, I think she is brilliant. Her problem is her past. But if Mahaney and others like him can have a following after their pasts, so can she.
P.S. I take that back.
In all my years of Christian TV watching, I have seen one male preacher tell husbands about what most women want sexually –
But I can’t give the preacher five stars on this, as he framed this in such a way like,
“husband, you want hot sex every night, here is how you do it” –
I mean, rather than just telling husbands to be sensitive to their wives needs for the sake of being sensitive, he framed it like, “here’s how it benefits you, husband!”, he told husbands stuff like foreplay begins before the bedroom at night, (you need to mop the floor without being asked, etc), and, he said, remember that women are slower to warm up (I guess he was hinting at foreplay).
Other than that, I don’t remember hearing a (male) preacher discuss what women want/need/prefer in the bedroom. It’s almost always what men need/ want/ prefer, and women are guilt tripped into servicing their hubby even if they don’t feel like it.
The one time I did hear a male preacher address it from the woman’s view, it was put in such a way not for women, but for the husband to get his needs met. So it was still male-centered.
Muff Potter wrote:
I think this is really the truth. The power women have over men is real and some men could resent that.
Oh yeah, the Botkins are a particular favorite here as well.
Actually, he teaches Truman Capote and Virginia Wolfe….
As a woman, I can understand his point of view: he teaches better when he teaches the books he loves. I feel the same way and most books I “love to teach” are written by men. Well, except “To Kill A Mockingbird”.
Why should he teach a book he is not passionate about just because it allows someone to check of the box “woman author”.
If anyone has the November 18, 2007 Scotland sermon MD did on Song of Songs, pipe up. The sermon got pulled before Peasant Princess began in 2008 and the Google docs synopsis of the raciest bits is simply not the same as having the full thing. As I’ve documented in a couple of spots Mars Hill associates have purged the woodchipper anecdote from “The Man” after Wendy Alsup quoted from it. The audio Chris Rosebrough made available to hear wasn’t even on the media library for A29 media resources to begin with, as best I can tell.
@ muzjik: But he sure sounds prejudiced…
@ muzjik: Quotes from The Guardian –
Like I said…
@ numo: I have to admit that I’m amused by his characterization of Chekhov and Tolstoy as He-Men (Chekhov especially). Tolstoy was a terrible womanizer when he was young, but apart from that, I jsut don’t get this.
F. Scott Fitzgerald has never struck me as being notably macho, either.
Have you tried the “Wat Back” machine?
Might be able to find something there.
Steve D, it’s very handy for webpages generally but I’ve never heard that it can be used to find pulled audio files before. Can it even do that?
David Gilmour is a friend of mine. He’s certainly one of the kindest people I know, it’s nice to recall all the encouragement he’s given me. He wasn’t bragging, he was speaking truthfully. He teaches his specialty, his passion. If that’ not your bag, have a nice day. Down the hall are profs who refuse to teach white hetero male writers because they are white hetero males, and they get a pass.
can’t assist on the Scotland thing, but here he is standing on someone’s grave at Arlington National Cemetery talking about men “having sex with their wives at least once a day”. This is what the church is tasked with concerning their teaching priorities. And perhaps this will be the topic of a break-out session at this Act Like Men conference.
makes me want to puke
Muff Potter wrote:
You’d lose the bet.
I am not suggesting you do, but if you listen to the SOS series he did, you’ll know what I mean.
Muff Potter, don’t make the bet, you’d lose money on it. Never mind the SOS sermons, the boot camps he did for mens’ training events got even more detailed.
Yeah, that was not imonks finest hour in his defense of Driscoll even to the point of deleting comments and admonishing people for saying Mark is a misogynist. (which we all now know he is) But perhaps if he knew what we know now?
wentatchee, you got the Haggard thing wrong. Driscoll did blame wives letting themselves go when the Haggard scandal broke. Thing is, it got deleted very quickly and the subsequent explanation sent out claimed he did not say what he did. I read the original so I know. However, back then people were not as savvy about screen shots as they are now. Whatever you find today will be the edited version. And we have much more experience in Driscoll deleting stuff since then.
yeah, I know one woman who sat through his discourse on marital sodomy. She now wishes she had gotten up and left but her husband was an Acts 29 church planter and that was to be their income. He is no longer affiliated thank God!
I’m not sure, However, it could lead to an alternative source for the file. Good luck!
Totally off thread.
I came to this site via Internet Monk. As a survivor I was interested and thankful for what the Deebs were writing. Do I like SNAP? No! But that’s not important. You have shown me Protestants. When I was a child the Klan burnt our Church. Now I live in an area that gave birth to the Posse Comitatus. Protestant missionaries tell me I don’t read the Bible, perhaps they think the seventeen Bibles in front of them are there because I need more books not to dust.
My sons are Protestants. ( boring story- short version many years I hated God )One day my older son said I needed to be under a man’s authority. After I stopped giggling I wondered where he learned such nonsense. That’s why I started reading Protestant sites – to understand such strange thinking. I don’t agree with your theology but I’ve come to love you. I spend eyesight reading your thoughts. And maybe the next time you want to write a rude remark about the Rosary, you will remember I hold you to God. Most good Jewish sons value their mothers. That sounds snarky. I want to say is that I have been wrong and I ask you to be gentle when you speak of the love some of us have for the mother of God.
Most all, thank you for your wit and caring.
I was unclear, I hold you to God. I mention you in the Rosary at 3pm and the Mass at 7am
Not all Protestants believe in male headship.
Have you heard of Christians for Biblical Equality? They are gender egalitarians.
If you do a web search for the phrase “Christians for Biblical Equality” you can find their web site.
Sometimes, Roman Catholics (are you a Roman Catholic?) believe in male headship too, such as these Roman Catholic guys:
6 Reasons to NOT Send Your Daughter to College – Fix the Family (Roman Catholic group)
I’m not Deb or Dee, and I’ve not read every single post on this blog, but I’ve not seen anyone make a “rude remark about the Rosary.” What is that in reference to? I don’t understand.
@ Daisy, I did read the post about stupid Catholics not wanting educated daughters. It was in that thread that rude remarks were made. I’m sorry the point of my comment was lost by my Irish anger. I do value you people. Which was what I wanted to say.
And often I’ve wanted to reach to you. it’s been 35 years of loneliness,sometimes people call me a dyke. I’m just a Catholic who cannot remarry. Loneliness lives, I think, in your bones.
I remember this from that video. Aside from being stupid and disturbing, what with all the other things women have to do at home in hard comp, when will she find the time to have sex multiple times a day? Make dinner, take care of the kids, clean the house, do the laundry, take out the trash, and oh yeah, honey, it’s time to have sex for the THIRD TIME today! Because I can’t just do without! *headdesk*
Maybe women don’t sleep in Mark’s world.
Wenatchee & TedS,
Nothing new there, I’ve lost money on football games too. But the remainder of my statement stands. These guys are scared $#!&-less of women on any other level but subservience.
I used to watch her deceased hubby Dr. Gene Scott (real doctorate by the way, from Stanford) on TV years ago too. I enjoy different ‘spins’ on Scripture because in a bizarre (perverse?) sort of way, it enables me to concoct my own ‘spin’ on Scripture as it were.
@ Anon 1:
Anon1, post what you have here. The specific wording about blaming wives would be useful to have to compare to not just screen captures but also reproductions of the content posted at other blogs the week it came out.
Or let’s find a way to compare notes, at any rate. I don’t think Driscoll actually apologized for anything he wrote in that post, just apologized that people felt offended by stuff he said he didn’t say.
Understanding in one word: PORN.
Because in Porn, the woman ALWAYS performs for the man’s pleasure, fulfills every one of the man’s sexual fantasies, No Matter What.
Like Michael Pearl demanding five-times-a-night performance on his wedding night.
Like Carolyn Mahaney servicing The Humble One while throwing up from morning sickness (chuckle chuckle).
The woman ALWAYS performs in Porn.
SoS says “her lover tasted sweet” — THAT was the rationale?
Talk about a wish-fulfillment interpretation….
I think we can safely assume what MD’s personal kink is.
@ will f: I appreciate you sticking up for a friend, but at the same time, what he said (and what he teaches) are matters of public record.
It’s hard to believe that he wasn’t exploiting the situation for comedy, but it seems he’s serious. At best, saying “I don’t reach [women, men, Chinese, gay, Canadian etc.] writers” is (imo) pretty ridiculous. I realize that you disagree, but still…
I’m in my early 40s, never married, and never had sex (following biblical teachings on that), and yes, sometimes other people (especially Christians of all backgrounds) often make insulting, negative assumptions on people based on your marital status, being suspected of being homosexual is one of them, but that usually happens to single Christian men.
I’ve more often run into Christians assuming I must be a feminist, obsessed with a career, or that I must be bitter, or, the Christians I come across online assume if you’re a woman still single past age 35, it must be because I am too fat or ugly to get a man (not true either).
They literally do not sleep.
Someone here posted a link to excerpts from a book by the Pearls where the guy discussed their honeymoon.
Pearl expected the new wife to chase crabs on the beach on their honeymoon – at night in bare feet, no shoes (IIRC), cook them up, make the bed, do this, that, and the other, on no sleep, plus he expected sex from her several times a day. I think this is the page with the story:
CTNAHM: Anticipation (Michael Talks about Sex)
@ Steve D: It’s entirely possible that there are files of his speaking in the audio archives at the site. definitely wroth a try.
I don’t know if this is what you are looking for or not:
Driscoll on the Defeat of Shame and the Scotland MP3s
I don’t want to actually right click to save any of those files, as I’m not interested in saving any trashy Driscoll sermons to my hard drive, so I have no idea if that guy’s files still work or not, or if it is the complete sermon or only partial.
The site that originally hosted/advertised the Scotland 2007 sermon is thoroughly scrubbed. 🙁
Some of the most astonishing stuff was probably never made available to the public to begin with, like that bus audio clip Chris Rosebrough got a hold of.
Daisy, the files can’t be downloaded. The scrub job on that sermon was thorough and Warnock was enough of a Driscoll fan to probably agree to take the audio down on his end, is my guess.
“..having sex with their wives at least once a day..”
reduces women to appliance-status. hah, look where mark driscoll has taken hierarchy. Will someone with influence who is reading this blog hold Mark Driscoll accountable and publicly insist on an apology from him done with sincerity? Do any of you have courage and conviction? Anyone?
kansaswheat – welcome.
Yes, I did read that article. And if I recall correctly, he didn’t notice anything was wrong until Debi collapsed in the shower and almost hit her head, and even then his first thought was basically, “Girls are soooooo weird, my brother never acted like this when we went camping and stuff.”
@ WenatcheeTheHatchet: I don’t suppose you could contact C. Rosebrough about this? (Of course, you might already have done that.)
@ Muff Potter:
Dr. Eugene Scott?? Santa Claus but slightly shorter hair and beard and in a remarkable hat (not red with white fur)? Meaner than 2nd skimmings? (to borrow from Rachel Lynde of “Anne of Green Gables”)
I was absolutely puzzled by him (many years ago) — I called the phone # on the screen just to see what would happen — never been spoken to so rudely in my life.
what did you learn/glean from him? anything worthwhile? anything of truth, or that mattered? i’m very curious.
Someone above was critical of Rachel Held Evans’ “Year of Biblical Womanhood” book. I found a related post about it that I thought was pretty good.
I think the lady who wrote this posts on this blog on occasion?
The blog post is interesting, as are the comments by her blog visitors. There are also more links in various responses under the main post:
Rachel Held Evans, Mary Kassian, The Gospel Coalition, and A Year of Biblical Womanhood
I’m sorry about that 🙁
Sometimes people take audio and put it in a video. In other words, you might be able to find the audio embedded in a video on Vimeo, You Tube, or God Tube (or whatever that Christian video site is now called).
Teaching is not primarily about the profs. Their job is to teach what the students need. Some of the material they will adore and some they won’t. And that understanding needs to be stated up front together with the admission that we have a big world and no one human will be passionate about everything that is wonderful.
Yes, we teach best that which we love most. The hard work, which is sacrificial and obligatory, is to try our best to also teach well the material that doesn’t thrill us.
will f wrote:
A good prof obliges himself to teach what the course requires. If he is lucky enough to eventually land a upper-level specialty course solely on what he loves, fine, but in solid university curricula, that should be an exception.
Personal kindness is all well and good. That he doesn’t care that he is indulging in academic “ghettoing” shows he doesn’t hold to the purpose of education. If I were head of his department, I’d require him to take a course on the meaning of the university in society, and put a big check on his attitude.
I had a friend who said the Catholic view of Mary gave her the only way to understand the feminine in her faith, and thus it helped her be able to fully worship. We enjoyed arguing about it because I put the feminine inside God rather than by raising Mary, but we both recognized that the traditional views wrongly excluded us and something had to give.
Like Driscoll&MacDonald, Gilmour separates humanity by sexuality and then belittles anything that is not his own sex. Such egocentricity should have no place in positions of expertise or guidance.
It is not that these men have nothing to say but, because they make the world only as big as themselves, what they have to say is very small-minded indeed.
And what they do not realize is that by such reductionism, their body of knowledge is forced into caricature because it cannot otherwise defend itself against our huge world of differences. That’s why they look silly.
Anon 1 wrote:
Here is another woman’s experience with sitting through the teaching.
Interesting to me. I often wonder if the gender role folks really stop and think how they map their views of both genders “being created in the Image of God”.
Bruce Ware of SBTS came up with a way around it. He claims that women are made in the “indirect image of God”. There are what he calls a “derivitive”
I checked out Melissa Scott’s site and found out that I could be a member of her church IF I become a “Kings Tither” first. This gives me the right to watch sermons not online. However, IF I want to visit the actual church, I have to get tickets. I kid you not.
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
Unfortunately, I think this is spot on.
@ Anon 1:
Another one joins the Charlatan Band Wagon, making the rounds in America, selling their religion.
He can teach whatever he likes. My point is that the interview reveals a man desperate to project a certain image that nevertheless comes off as contrived, something common to insecure people from Tumblr to Mars Hill Church. His inclusion of that empty, overrated gasbag Henry Miller is a dead giveaway for me (“Let us have more oceans, more upheavals, more wars, more holocausts”). As the kids say, he’s a try-hard. He’s as enmeshed in identity politics as any queer studies major.
@ Headless Unicorn Guy:
Yes, this is the underlining issue with all of these men who teach this.
And it’s not even that all of them are watching (or still watching) vast amounts of porn right now. But they are very influenced by porn they have viewed in the past and by our pornified culture. Sadly, instead of coming out and being separate from the world, they are incorporating the porn into their teaching and making it a pornified gospel, which is no gospel at all, for anyone. Especially women.
Anon 1 wrote:
Bruce Ware is a derivative, as is every human except the first.
It’s as if these guys think there’s not enough God to go around so they finagle to keep the majority for themselves.
You would NEVER call our friends Mark D. and James M. bullies, would you?
Stephen Fry and Hugh Laurie, not Hugh Grant (much better Hugh, this one).
Muff Potter wrote:
Even running the danger of repeating myself – fear is the driving force of all fundamentalism. Fear of losing control over those others that used to be so submitted and are now getting “uppity” – women, blacks, you name it.
Even if many of your new YRR and complementarian crowd does not look like your average fundy.
Gus, you are in Austria? Hey, you are right about fear being the driving force of all fundamentalism whether it is fundamental Islam or Christianity. Fear of losing control over others. That is the key.
Mara, Thanks for the link. She says something that I am hearing from many quarters these days NOT just Driscoll but from many others of his ilk:
” We discovered too late that we were so steeped in Mark’s twisted teachings about “secondary” matters–which actually became quite Primary in Mark’s teaching–that we could no longer open our Bible without seeing anger and condemnation in it. We could no longer bring ourselves to read a book of the Bible that Mark hadn’t commentated on in sermons or writing, because we couldn’t trust our own interpretations. Mark crippled our faith and our joy in the Lord when HE became our “holy spirit.””
I cannot tell you all how many people I am hearing this from. Now, there are those who say this is ridiculous and no way could this happen to those truly saved, blah blah.
But it does.
It is amazing how penetrating (no pun intended) false teaching/wolf behavior can become a person’s normal. That is how dangerous it is. It can take years to retrain our brains to think for ourselves.
Those who are able to claw their way out of these charlatan pits worked hard for it. Let me tell you.
She ended her statement with this: “Liberty University, I ask you, how do you regard the body of Christ? Now is your chance to let us know.”
Well, I guess Liberty University let her know – loud and clear.
Anon 1 wrote:
I visited Austria in the summer of 2006 when I chaperoned a choir that included both of my daughters. They sang in several of your magnificent cathedrals, along with other choirs from around the world.
We spent several days in Salzburg and two days in Vienna.
We loved visiting all the places that were filmed in the Sound of Music. I watched that movie when I arrived home, and I saw it from a whole new vantage point. It was interesting that many Austrians had never seen The Sound of Music and were irritated that the true story was badly distorted. I can understand that, but it's still one of my favorites!
yes, I’ve mistakenly misnamed him before. I own the whole series — can’t figure out why I keep doing this. so very talented, they both are (Fry & Laurie). in my opinion, they put most other comedians to shame.
but not dawn French.
“In The Kingdom Of God, The Use Of Force Is Authorized?!?”
I’ze hopin’ youze well…
It would appear what all these Neo-Calvinists have in common, is that they all believe that the use of “Force” is authorized. ( [example:] As in the Mark Driscoll’s Grave Yard YouTube video “”A Good Soldier””, (at about the six minute mark) where Pastor Mark Driscoll speaks of getting and “forcing” young men…ta do stuff”. *
All of the Apostles, including Paul of Tarsus, used Jesus’s method which was “persuation”; as in “we pursuade Men…”
This is very profound and telling.
It is also ‘most’ disturbing.
By the way, the last time I checked, I did not see God Almighty “Force” Abraham or Moses (for example) do anything.
For that matter God Almighty didn’t “force” Jesus ta do anything, none neither; i.e. (for example) He (Jesus) was “lead” by the Holy Spirit into the desert…
P.S. Thanx fer all ya do ta keep us Wartburg Watch readers in tall cotton! -grin-
* theresurgence.com 2007 video “A Good Soldier””A frank conversation with Pastor Mark Driscoll of Mars Hill Church, Seattle about the costs and the requirements of being a church planter.”
What bugs me about this conference is how they are twisting that phrase to anoint their agenda. The phrase “act like men” in other translations is simply a charge to believers to be courageous or valiant. The greek word in question happens to be etymologically related to the word for “man.” It has little to do with a male “gender role,” although we all know that’s exactly what this conference is about.
“Act like women” can also have a “warrior”/Valor connotation since Ezer has a warrior connotation.
I’ve come to the conclusion that nowadays it’s impossible to get past puberty without developing some sort of sexual paraphilia. Only hope is that your paraphiliae are only embarrassing instead of genuinely destructive.
And humans have a real bad track record of mixing the Sacred and the Erotic. No matter how you try to mix it, let Entropy set in for a couple generations and eventually you’re screwing in the groves of Asherah with all the other fertility cultists, worshipping S*E*X 24/7.
A longstanding if hardly respectable part of American culture.
Paging Elmer Gantry… Paging Elmer Gantry…
I think Ware is trying to tell us God is male and only they were created in God’s “direct” Image. Women are a derivative and only have “man’s image). I think he is missing Gen 1 from his seminary bible. :o)
Gene Scott was the Crazy Uncle of TV preachers — you know, the Crazy Uncle you don’t trust with the kids or anything breakable but you invite him to all the family reunions because he’s just so colorful?
Back when he had his own 24-hour cable channel in the Eighties, I’d keep it on as background filler at home — mostly to see “what this maniac is going to do next”. NOW GIT ON THOSE TELEPHONES!
Scott’s approach was an academic one, and probably a carefully crafted part of his mystique-showmanship-on-stage-persona. Some have argued that he was the first Christian-pastor-shock-jock to hit the airwaves. I like to give credit where credit is due though. Scott would dissect Hebrew characters from right to left the way they were meant to be read (Bushnell did it too) and in my opinion, the dimensional shift can uncover nuances that Occidentals often overlook.
Anon 1 wrote:
Or he’s using the Dake’s Annotated Bible and reading only the marginal notes. Dake taught that God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit, all the angels, demons, and “spirit animals” were male (physically male) and the female was a special dispensation among physical bodies for procreation purposes. Can’t remember if he taught that women would be Resurrected as male. Bad Craziness.
People’s lives are usually more complicated than is good for a Hollywood movie, so the true story will almost always be distorted for the screenplay.
Also, for many years people didn’t want to be reminded of the less savoury aspects, if I may call them that, of our history – that’s why the film never became a big hit in Austria when it was released – the Nazi past was not that far away then, and that’s why it never became famous in Austria.
I myself was quite surprised when I first found out in England that there was such a popular film about Austrian events that I had never heard about, and of course I did not know then that it’s such a big hit in the US.
I’m happy for you that you enjoyed your stay.
My only comment to that:
Now THAT is a male nymphomaniac and his ***************** (ed.) doll.
Cooker, cleaner, breeder, and personal porn star.
@ Headless Unicorn Guy:
There has been some very bizarro world stuff coming out of SBTS for the last 10 years or so. I have come to the conclusion those exalted profs the YRR salivate over have too much time and money on their hands and not enough hard questions thrown at them.
Ware also taught that unsubmissive wives trigger abuse.
Moore teaches that complementarians are wimps and we need Patriarchy. He got upset that a wife suggested her husband attend promise keepers. She was “out of place”. Moore also teaches that cremation is wrong for believers. I could go on and on folks. You would not believe it. Or there was the teaching that women would be submitting to their husbands in heaven. (Mormon!!!)
Some of this stuff was up on CBMW site years ago
Most of them teach that Jesus is a lesser god in the Trinity. (Burke, Ware, Moore, etc)
It is mass false teaching and delusion at SBTS. Beware.
(off topic and for HUG)
Brony Fired For ‘My Little Pony’ Obsession: ‘FiredBrony’ Tells Reddit His Co-Workers Grew Uncomfortable Over ‘MLP’ Fandom
~ (back on topic) ~
About Ware teaching that women are only indirectly made in God’s image.
Physically, that may be true of the first woman, since she was made from Adam’s rib, but… all men after that come from women.
And, “made in God’s image” seems to refer to inner qualities, such as the ability to reason, having intellect, emotion, etc, and the Bible clearly says that both male and female are in God’s image.
There is no asterisk with a footnote in the Bible saying, “but males more so,” or, “females not as much.”
@ Muff Potter:
very interesting. to be honest, I never paid attention long enough to get to what you are describing (his dissecting of Hebrew right to left, the nuances yielded) and the like — but I believe you.
One of my biggest indictments of Christian culture is the limited scope of reading and hearing and ingesting only what one’s peers produce. Breathing each other’s oxygen-poor, brain-dozing exhales in that “Masculine Mystique Mylar Hot-Air Balloon” Patrice mentioned. Quite a few women float around in there, too.
Daisy, A good place to start is Gen 1. He “created them male and female”. Adam means “human”. That is ‘creation’.
In Gen 2 He “forms”.
Some scholars believe that “Image of God” refers to free will which would include your list of intellect, reasoning, etc.
Muff Potter wrote:
Boy I agree with that. A huge problem for us is the lack of education/understanding of ancient cultures. And you are right that Bushnell takes this on.
They believe what they want to believe because they are human and want to assuage
The pain of life that you know ~ from Madonna’s song ‘Vogue’. But I think they’d have far better luck on the dance floor as Madonna also points out in her song.
The best article I have ever read, addressing this issue of “persuasion” vs “brute force:
Anon 1 wrote:
Yeah. The way I see it is their God is too small to have more than one specific creature made in his image: the human male. All those “other” humans (bless the dears!) can only derive their being through by basking in the beams reflected from those God-imaged males.
It’s the Humbuggery of Male Preeminence. Because in my reality, the only reflections are these guys’ images in the Magic Bible Mirror. “Mirror mirror on the wall, Who looks like God most of all?” Whoop!
Now if, as Daisy mentions, they were extraordinarily good-looking, one might at least see a point to it, even if still unacceptable. But not so much.
Nevertheless, I congratulate Bruce Ware on giving us any consideration at all.
“I appreciate you sticking up for a friend, but at the same time, what he said (and what he teaches) are matters of public record.
It’s hard to believe that he wasn’t exploiting the situation for comedy, but it seems he’s serious. At best, saying “I don’t reach [women, men, Chinese, gay, Canadian etc.] writers” is (imo) pretty ridiculous. I realize that you disagree, but still…”
Hi Numo. Yes, he says he was speaking glibly, making a joke that doesn’t come off in print and that makes sense…. And what’s ridiculous? He teaches his specialty, just like anybody else. Down the hall is another prof who doesn’t teach men, American, white readers–so what? they all have their specialty, what happened to live and let live. If you’d been in his home, seen the way he interacts with his wife, son, daughter, students, you’d really see how some little article can’t do justice do a life. Then you’d see it’s not just ‘sticking up for a friend’ it’s, wow, what an object lesson in how the internet can tarnish a life is just a few keystrokes…as another u of t prof said, the medium is the message…
Human souls don’t matter unless they’re male and under 40. Wow.
I think the idea of maleness being the true form and femaleness something derivative may actually have it exactly backward. Humans can live without a Y chromosome but cannot live without an X chromosome. There are some biologists who believe that the Y chromosome began as a defective X chromosome, which would support the idea of the female form being the basic form. Note also that males have unnecessary are rudimentary breasts, possibly a carry over from the female form. Of course, the Patriarchists who wrote the OT could not have conceived of woman being the higher form.
KR Wordgazer wrote:
Hi KR, human (female) souls matter when and how they want us to be of value. 🙁
Hi Patrice, please do me a favour and try to give David the benefit of the doubt a bit. “He can teach whatever he likes. My point is that the interview reveals a man…” See, that is the thing. The interview most certainly DOES NOT reveal a man! It distorts a man, conceals a man, in a jetson-age version of telephone game. His behavior which I have observed first hand reveals a man, but an off the cuff 10 minute interview does not ‘reveal a man.’ How could it? Any human is too much a mystery for that to be possible.
“Gilmour separates humanity by sexuality” No he doesn’t. It may seem that way to you based on a news story, but the news story is not him.
“A good prof obliges himself to teach what the course requires. If he is lucky enough to eventually land a upper-level specialty course solely on what he loves, fine, but in solid university curricula, that should be an exception.”
David does teach what the course requires: he devises the curriculum himself. ‘An upper level specialty course solely on what he loves’ is exactly what he teaches. And he is an excellent teacher.
“Personal kindness is all well and good. That he doesn’t care that he is indulging in academic “ghettoing” shows he doesn’t hold to the purpose of education. If I were head of his department, I’d require him to take a course on the meaning of the university in society, and put a big check on his attitude.”
If you are really concerned about academic ghettoing in Canadian universities, there are bigger fish to fry.
I doubt you find this persuasive but I appreciate you taking the time to read it. Scary to think how easy a good guy and a great novelist can be lynched electronically these days.
“A friend of mine once told me a story about anacondas. He said they mate only once and then they roll off into the jungle, sometimes without seeing each other for years. But when they meet again they raise their bodies high up from the jungle floor and wrap themselves around each other, swaying back and forth in the moist shadows. It’s a lovely image and it gives me a lump in my throat because I always think about J and me when I think about that story, but I don’t think it’s going to work that way for us. No, it occurs to me now–and I don’t know why it’s taken so many years–that maybe you can miss somebody without wanting them back, that maybe J and I have already had our last dance under the eucalyptus tree…”
David Gilmour, Back on Tuesday
Note to Alex….when WOMEN start sexually abusing children in their congregations, covering it up, and then expecting the people in the church to look the other way….you can bet dee and deb will be all over it. Overwhelmingly, sexual abuse is USUALLY MALE and that is one of the main tenants of this blog…to expose it. Deal with it.
I’m coming a bit late to this thread as we were away at the w/e (the 50th wedding anniversary of my parents-in-law to be specific). I’ve skimmed through it, but I can’t be sure I’m not going over old ground.
I first approached Park Fiscal with some enthusiasm and much optimism, having heard only good things about him at the time and knowing nothing of any controversy, nor about any pile of bodies behind his bus. One preacher, and only one preacher, changed my mind about Fiscal: Fiscal himself. After listening through an entire sermon series of his I could in no way consider him a “bible teacher” – he was neither bible nor teacher.
What he (and others like him) is, however, is a leader (Romans 12: ὁ προϊστάμενος, one who stands before, or first). Had he only been content with diligently submitting that gift to others, he might have been a great asset to the church; unfortunately, he has grasped for other ecclesiastical labels with higher status. So a gifted leader became a false shepherd.
The real irony is that, certainly here in the UK, we do lack leaders and, indeed, believers of any kind who are ready to fight. Specifically, I mean fight on behalf of the poor and the downtrodden, and against injustice. This doesn’t involve amassing political power and using it to destroy fellow-believers, nor even manifestly corrupt individuals of any description. But it does mean marshalling evidence and arguments, standing firm in the face of criticism and opposition, and being unafraid to share in the shame and reproach of socially despised groups by walking alongside them. (And more besides, of course.)
It is this that we often lack in the UK. Lesley’s and my deepest wish is to be part of a movement that changes, permanently, the way we view the struggling unemployed in this country: that is, people who would do almost anything to get work that would enable them to feed their families, but who remain unemployed simply because they are unemployed. Something that upholds their cause, gives them a voice and successfully and consistently leads them into decent employment is – we believe – inextricably a part of the good news to the poor and is a work of the Kingdom in the same way that the abolition of slavery was. But we’ve found few fellow-Christians who will join their faith to ours in this; they generally just tell us to give that up as too difficult and complicated and just start a little relaxed housegroup for a few local unemployed people.
Now, I’ve met people, women as well as men, who are indeed small-minded and babyish; some of them are christians. In the UK, that latter group tend to be very passive and to be deeply in love with pleasant and insular forms of church. It frustrates Lesley (who, believe me, is a woman, and more stunningly so with every month that passes IMHO) as much as it does me. I don’t think that’s feminine, though.
Thank God for your website! It occurs to me in this day and age, that men like my father (who is the most Christlike, manly man I’ve ever known) never had to go to a conference, or read a best selling book to know how to be a man. They read the Bible, studied Jesus, followed His command to love others as yourself, and treated women as valuable ministers of the Word – with absolute respect. Like…..Jesus.
An Attorney wrote:
Question: I love Hamilton, by why are the Act Like Men guys coming here, instead of Toronto or Buffalo, both an hour away, or anywhere else? Wouldn’t think we’d be a particularly target-rich market for them…Hope the visitors have a chance to enjoy all the great hiking trails along the Niagara Escarpment…
There is a “masculine mystique” still influencing US society which these groups are capitalizing on. This blog post I did recently seems apropos to the topic:
@ Chris: I look forward to meeting him one day.
your dad makes me think of a short ingredients list of 3 basic, good things. Tastes great, feels good, promotes good health.
as opposed to a very long, bewildering laboratory-sounding one — all to generate something new and improved to get attention and grab customers and keep the food company busy, replacing naturally occurring goodness (that has been unwittingly processed out) with pretend, manufactured goodness, & adding 3 more ingredients to combat the problems that the previous 4 ingredients caused.
The latter tastes nice, goes down nice, and ruins your health. but keeps pharmaceutical in business.
Welcome to TWW! Love your comment. I can say the same about my dad.
@ justabeliever: You bet we'll expose women abusers!
Just as I do not have to go to a conference, or read a best selling book to know how to be a woman. Somehow the Holy Spirit manages to work without merchandise!
@ will f:
Ach, will f, you obviously love this professor. He must have some ability as a prof and he obviously knows how to write. So, a few points:
1.A writer (as any artist) can do fine work and be of questionable personal character. Likewise, a person can be a loving father/husband and yet say/do perfectly wretched things officially. This is an unfortunate truth for many of us.
2.When there is an artist who also is a good prof, that is a lovely thing. This however, doesn’t mean the artist/prof understands the importance of a broad and compassionate education for students.
3. Even if this prof was merely being snarky and was additionally a victim of a journalist with ulterior motives, he should not have said what he did. He is a man with obvious language skills and an ability to teach complex subject matter. I cannot give him a pass on what I will, on your behalf, label as poor comedy.
4. Our world remains very hard on women. Moreover, the educational system is still largely white male both in information and delivery even after the decades of (dubious) identity studies. This prof has decided to participate in the divisiveness (even if as a joke) in a way that deepens rather than alleviates an already deep human problem. I cannot approve of it.
5. I have not lynched your professor. To say so is an insult to lynching, if you know what I mean. I am criticizing his (apparently) off-handed treatment of women and his lack of understanding about education. This is fair because he made public statements.
I would never wish you to let go the good that he taught you. Anytime the world is made deeper, larger, more serious and more delightful, far be it from me to get in the way.
Hi Patrice, and thank you. Point 5: Lynching. Right, there is not a literal noose around his neck. If, however, this story ends with him losing his job and his income, that’s a bit more than nothing. Point 4: “our world remains very hard on women.” Yes, it sure does. ‘This present evil age’ (Galatians) is under an evil spell. Reading this whole thread made me kind of agitated. We should view every person we meet as being endlessly valuable, of unsurpassable worth, because that’s how our creator views that person, but take off the masks and so much of this world is about POWER. Getting power by reducing humans created in the image of God into tools. Jesus come quickly.
Maybe you’ll see Back on Tuesday on a shelf sometime. That ending always chokes me up. Take care.
I find this interesting they mention the Titanic and how some men acted.
I remember one Christian speaker speaking about the Titanic and how there were some “men” that in desperation/cowardice dressed up like women as a means of getting on a lifeboat. This speaker used this to illustrate what a situation like a ship sinking will bring out in some men and how other situations can do the same thing.
IMO, the exposure of C.J. Mahaney’s sin and hypocrisy and how both Sovereign Grace Leaders and other “Calvinista” leaders responsed brought out and exposed what kind of “leaders” these men proved to be. With Mahaney, you had leaders both in and outside of the movement whitewashing C.J. Mahaney’s sin rather than exposing and dealing with it.
Just like the Titanic sinking exposed the cowardice of some men and what they would do to survive the Mahaney debacle showed just how insincere C.J. Mahaney was about doing the right thing when it applied to himself. It also exposed the corruptness or how deceived so many other “Calvinista” leaders are.
With everything that has come out, Mahaney’s “I’m the worst sinner I know” comment is quite ironic.
@ will f:
Thanks for linking to Gilmour’s graceful and honest piece. I also love Tolstoy and laughed that Stalin did too. It’s a funny old world, isn’t it?
I have never understood why power-hunger can be fed only through demeaning others. It’s such an expensive way to gain personal certainty!
Don’t worry about Gilmour’s career. He’s well-established. Any pushback he receives will only be good for him, if he chooses to find it so. And besides, criticism is part of the artist’s life and a thick-enough skin is developed early on.
I think he had a fine student in you. I wish you the best.
One last comment. Thanks to Wenatchee for the titles by Garrett, which I will check. And thanks to Wordgazer for linking to her post.
KR Wordgazer wrote:
I liked your post on your blog. I too have read Coontz and I think both of you have a knack for simplifying and distilling what others burn up thousands of words on and still not say a god-cussed thing. And before I build my own gallows and cinch the rope around my own neck, I’ll stop there…
Since the post about Dave Kraft is closed for comments, it looks like he’s off the bus himself these days as far as leadership goes.
I just want to take a moment to encourage you to keep hanging in there and to NOT give up on Christ! I was raised by an extremely selfish, abusive, and neglectful woman who was a mean-spirited jerk to her family behind closed doors, but knew EXACTLY how to put on the fake "Christian" face in public and in church. I know that if I were to tell a lot of those church members today about the hell she put me through, they would NEVER truly believe me because she wore the hypocritical, lying mask so perfectly well. Tragically, there are SO many abusers going to church today who are EXACTLY like that, so if and when the truth of the way they REALLY treat others finally surfaces or their victims ever discuss it, they are so often not believed. This is part of the reason why I really stopped attending church AGES ago. I am no longer affiliated with any church anywhere, and so I don't fit in well with the overall idea of what a Christian is supposed to be, that's true. But just because I find church (and really, social situations in general these days) too painful and difficult, it DOES NOT MEAN that I have ever (or WILL EVER) give up on Christ, and you shouldn't either. The God who created this planet, sunrises and sunsets and mountains and beaches and stars and INFINITE wonders IS a HOLY, PERFECT Being, and a Being who is TRULY holy and perfect and sinless (as Christ clearly is) will NOT sin against you to harm you the way that imperfect, sinful human beings do. I can well understand your feeling tempted to want to throw in the towel because I'm going through a very painful kind of trial in my own personal life and I've struggled with that temptation too, but I know Jesus loves me too much to ever give up on me so I cannot and will not give up on Him, and I beg you not to do the same. It's true that, tragically, sinful human beings CANNOT be trusted. That's a bitterly painful lesson I've learned over and over AND OVER again in my own personal life. And, tragically, just because a person is PROFESSING to be a born-again Christian, it does NOT automatically mean that he or she truly is. Tragically, I suspect that the REAL Church, the number of REAL born-again Christians in the world, is far, far smaller than the number of all the people who are simply CLAIMING to be Christians. Jesus didn't say that the path that leads to eternal life through Him is narrow and that it is few who find it for nothing. But truth and eternal life ARE IN HIM. PLEASE don't let go of something so infinitely precious as that because of the sinfulness of others. Just because humanity is sinful DOES NOT MEAN that God cannot be trusted. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit created humanity to be perfect and sinless in the beginning and the evil and cruelty in today's world is NOT something He brought into it. But I DO understand how hard it can be to lose sight of that at times. I've had so many times when I've been so terrified that God would betray me and abuse me just as my first parents did, and to be perfectly honest, that's a very deep fear in me I STILL struggle with, but my dear Lord has always treated me with great patience and kindness and understanding, and I know He'll bring me through my own personal trials and struggles now because He's done it before, and I know He'll do the same for you. *HUGS*
This post nails it. This macho man Christian nonsense is being sold in evangelical megachurches everywhere. At my church a couple years ago we had something similar. At six o’clock on Wednesday mornings, we were shown videos about how what’s wrong with everything, and I mean everything, is that there are no longer any ” real men”. The videos were interspersed with footage from war and action movies which were used as good examples of what a “Biblical man” is all about. I noticed that the curriculum materials had very few Scriptural references, and the few there were, instead of being the foundation, they were just molded around the core “man up” message that the authors pulled out of their posteriors. Also, the slick glossy curriculum book had this recurring feature called “guy experiences” or something which suggested good manly things to do as guys. I kid you not, one of the suggestions was to take an outing to a good cigar store. Yes, to have a great Christian man fellowship experience, there’s nothing like the boys puffing away on hand rolled stogies.
Needless to say I was comforted to see that over the course of the program attendance dropped precipitously until there was probably 30% of the original standing room only crowd there at the beginning.
Patrice, as one Tolstoy fan to another, who has ever written more scenes that can squeeze your heart with an iron fist, make you feel physically sick, make you stand up and jump for joy, than that guy?
1 The bit in Master in Man when the rich guy and the driver realize they are lost in the blinding blizzard and have no clue which way to go.
2 The death of Andrei
3 The bit when Natasha goes to the party, gets all happy, then gets terrified that nobody’s going to ask her to dance, then somebody asks her to dance–and the reader feels like it’s happening to him/her…
4 The bit when Anna Karenina’s hubby finds out she’s stepping out, stays up all night pacing the floor and his life is described as a rope slung across a chasm, but now he finds out the rope is imaginary…
5 Several bits with Pierre, like when he’s leaving home, and sees a tree. Much later when he comes back and is feeling suicidal, he sees that the tree, ins spite of it all, is blooming! And that puts the wind back in his sails.
5 There’s a bit in The Death of Ivan when he finds out the only way to get pain relief is to put his feet on his slave’s shoulders. One time he falls asleep, wakes up and find that his feet are on the shoulders of the uncomplaining slave, who has also fallen asleep in that position. It is such a raw moment of human empathy it’s hard to even think about without choking up…
ok. all the best to you.
Gee Will. I have read W&P about 8x and you have hit on some great scenes. I will admit, Natasha is my least favorite character while most love her, I know. I cannot help but like Pierre who is finding his place as the late comer rich bastard of a nobleman. But, I LOVE General Kutuzov, best quote in the book:
“Russia’s ancient and sacred capitol? Allow me to tell you, Your Excellency, that that question has no meaning for a Russian! Such a question cannot be put! It’s senseless! The question I’ve asked you and these gentlemen to meet and discuss is a military one! The question is of saving Russia! Is it better to give up Moscow without a battle or, by accepting battle, lose the army as well as Moscow? Well, gentlemen, I see I am the one who has to pay for the broken crockery. Gentlemen, I’ve heard your views. Some of you will not agree with me, but I , by the authority entrusted to me by my sovereign and my country… order a retreat.”
“The only important battle is the last”
I have an incredible edition my uncle gave me published in the early 1920’s that I really cherish.
I reallly really really wish I had never seen the old movie(1956) with Henry Fonda as Pierre. Talk about bad casting.
Steve what did the “real” men on the Titanic do about the women and children in steerage? There was also a big socio economic piece to who got saved.
I live in Toronto (45 minutes from Hamilton), so I thought that I might go to the Act Like Men conference a) ironically, b) to see what goes on at these things to be better informed c) to be amused d) to be appalled (like going to a horror flick) e) to improve my ability to warn others against this movement. I admit that some of these aren’t perhaps the best motives, but alas. In any case, an individual ticket is $111. I don’t value irony that much, apparently.
If the Bible word was “man” as in “human” rather than “man” as in “male”, then the whole idea of “act like a man” has a totally different connotation! “Act like a Human” suggests things like compassion, caring for the weak, etc. Kind of the thing that scouting teaches. Definitely not MMA and “I can beat you up!”
Though maybe I should bite the bullet and write a guest reporting post for Wartburg Watch..
Perhaps we should raise funds to send Caleb so he can report back without having to pay so much in order to do so. Perhaps we can raise enough to equip him with a secret camera, or interviewing equipment under the guise of, “reporting this momentous” event for posterity.
Just thinking out loud.
An Attorney wrote:
Actually, from my understanding, there are Hebrew teachings as far back as the second temple that teach that Eve, made last after God declared it “not good” for man to be alone, was the pinnacle of God’s creation. I have never read or seen these Midrashim, so I may be unwittingly passing along an urban legend, but it is an interesting perspective.
I had to look at that exact word/verse on my blog in a critique of Doug Phillips’ lecture on manliness. The word is andrizomai which basically means to “man up” (derived from aner for “man” or “male”). But in context Paul is talking to the whole Corinthian church, so whatever “man up” means, Paul wants the women to do it too. Silly Paul, blurring gender and role distinctions like that. Tsk tsk.
There are three things I genuinely bless Providence for every morning:
1) I am not a Democrat
2) I am not a Republican
3) I am NOT as bad as Mahaney.
Actually, General Kutozov offers a great piece of advice: “When in doubt, do nothing.” Reminds me of President Coolidge saying “Do you realize how many problems we could solve if people would just sit still and keep quiet?”
Pierre is great. He struggles feel so real! That bit when he’s on the battlefield and he’s thinking, I’m supposed to kill him, and he might kill me today, just because somebody else said so–this is all so absurd!
Henry Fonda as Pierre? Hooray for Hollywood.
dee, friends from my church are going, so I’m sure I’ll hear about it. My church is right across the street from Copps Coliseum.
will f wrote:
Yes, we could learn from both him and Coolidge, quite frankly.(Cool non descript Cal is one of my fav presidents. He once came home from church and his sick wife asked him what the preacher preached on. “Sin”, he replied. :o)
Kutozov was advising “patience and waiting them out”. It is kind of ironic that Stalin loved W&P yet Hitler would have been well advised to have read it before he invaded Russia and the brutal Russian winter set in.
“With everything that has come out, Mahaney’s “I’m the worst sinner I know” comment is quite ironic.”
We should have believed him.
Dee, I’ll see if the wife will let me go 🙂
@ Caleb W:
We would love to feature a guest post from you. Please get permission from your wife. Remember, she's prohibited from attending with you. 🙂
will f wrote:
We'd love to get a report!
So….perhaps SoS is really prescriptive for us today in that we, the Bride of Christ, are to look carefully and opt for our true Shepherd, Jesus, instead of the flashy JMac & MD pastors of this world.
Ha – good point, Solomon was hardly faithful!
Oh, Solomon was faithful, alright, faithful to satisfy his urges to do whomever his eyes fell upon and looked attractive to him.
Well, it doesn’t look like I’ll be able to go to the conference. This weekend is just too busy. I am, however, going to try to check out Furtick’s new “elevation” church plant in Toronto.
Only someone with severe insecurities about “being a man” would constantly obsess about telling others to “act like men.”
Most secure men probably don’t even think about “acting like a man.” They just do it naturally.
Caleb W wrote:
Be sure to take good notes and bring us a report of your experiences.
(Avoiding obvious cheesy joke potential about your biblical namesake 🙂
Mr H, Can my friend Joshua come along?
Dee/Deb, I’m going to head to Elevation Toronto on October 20 or 27. I’ll let you know if there is anything worth noting over there.
I would also point out that Elevation “Toronto” is actually in Mississauga (the west side of Mississauga), which is a city west of Toronto. Mississauga is part of the Greater Toronto Area but is not Toronto. I guess “Elevation Mississauga” doesn’t have the same ring to it to the brain trust down in Charlotte. Its all about the brand.
There they go again! Macdonald comes to Hamilton and calls it Act Like Men Toronto, and good luck telling people in Mississauga they’re Torontonians, what a first impression. Anybody have that clip where Spinal Tap are on the simpsons and the guy says, “I’ve been all around the world and nobody rocks harder than… (turns over his guitar, sees somebody has duct taped a cue card that says ‘springfield’ on it) …Springfield!” Crowd goes wild…
I’ve seen that Driscoll video before, but every time I re-watch it, the same thought occurs:
“Did you seriously just say that the feminine aspects of the human race are what’s keeping the church from being innovative? Wow, thanks.” :/
Pingback: Conference circuit time for celebrity Calvinists – Act Like Men | Bene Diction Blogs On
Men, have you had your spiritual prostate exam?
Check out the same issue at http://fbcjaxwatchdog.blogspot.com/
ref was to @ notastepfordsheep:
So they want to get into your anus as well as your wallet? This is the most ridiculous marketing ploy that I have seen for a Christian group ever.
And I do not think Acts 29 is healthy enough to tell others what their spiritual illnesses are. Anyone who counts Driscoll among their leaders is sick, sick, sick. Physician, heal thyself
For any man to get any positive info on how become a better man in this day and age of such brokenness. Is an awesome thing! The Lord don’t want us too covet what others have or do. Let’s praise the Lord and the men who share the gospel. When are children are exposed to such evil in day to day living. Are we becoming weaker images of our old selves? This could be a cult convention that leads us astray to preach about the devil. Are your glass half full? Has God not been there for you. As men we need to be there for our families. Not cause strife amongst those who share God’s word. I get that these men may have said something you don’t like. Or have more of a manly hand instead of piano hands. So put your your little spirit fingers down and raise a hand to the Lord who sent us his son. The NEW COVENANT is what we live under. Let’s not sacrifice these men. But be thankful for them!
I have an extremely enlarged prostate. I am very familiar with prostate exams, both the DRE and the ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy. No fun. At least I KNOW I’m not into Driscollese sex.
What are these guys with their “spiritual prostate exams” using for reality? Have they ever had an ultrasound dildo shoved up their butt and twelve biopsy needles shot through the colon wall into their prostate? Peed blood for two weeks afterwards? (I wrecked four sets of underwear that way.) If they haven’t, they will be — if you’re not a castrato, every male’s prostate is going to go bad eventually. Maybe they’ll be singing a different tune then.
eduell – I don’t think I can be thankful for James MacDonald, a man who has driven his church into $65 million of debt.
Are you thankful for him?
And if so where do you draw the line on bad behavior. Are you, for example, also thankful for Jim Jones? He had a few redeeming qualities for many years. I think naivete is useless, and it definitely isn’t biblical. Jesus and Paul and Peter warned about avaricious leaders within the Christians ranks. We are to identify them and call them what they are. Nothing in their teachings suggest we should be thankful for wolves in sheep’s clothing.
What we really need is a conference on how to put on a conference.
@ Randall Slack: I would be happy to write a book on the conference.
Eduell respectfully, you need to learn to paddle your own boat.
Huh? Better men? From men who get their churches in terrible debt while they live in million dollar homes? This is learning to be a better man? I am to be thankful for the pain caused by these guys? Good night! It sounds like fractured Scripture to me.
So point the finger at others and pick apart and dissect the good intentions of others without reason or really knowing. Others seek to do the work of the Lord, and God is working through them.
This has to be one of the most arrogant and prideful group of people to post this article let alone agree with it. I couldn’t differentiate if this was a discussion from CNN or a Christian network.
Ya know what, I kind of like Mr. Driscol and pastor James because of a few reasons that you all were very nice to point out. They are not perfect. They are sinner. It is nice to know I can better relate to them to all the perfect people hating on them on this site.
@ Tyler: This arrogant and prideful group of people choose to allow you to negatively comment on them. Now, try to do same thing with Driscoll and MacDonald and perhaps you will get a lesson on pride.
And Tyler, don’t forget: congregationalism is from Satan. James MacDonald said so.
But they are thankful for followers like you, I am sure. I would prefer you follow Christ. And no, it is not the same thing.
The current context, let’s remember, is one in which several commenters have posted spoof comments in what amounts to a test of Poe’s law (that a parody of extremism is indistinguishable from the real thing). Is “Tyler” a parodist, or a non-Christian? It is genuinely hard to say.
However, I do think the phrase “Mr Driscoll and pastor James” is worth adopting. It has a literary ring to it.
P.S. “Tyler” – to be fair, you have dibs on that one. Please let me know if you’d like to copyright it.
I’m curious as to your view of their theological premise. Do you disagree with their message or just that they’re making money? I’ve only been a Christian for 15 years, but my sense is that manhood is under attack and virtually neutered from the modern mainline churches. Do you believe this is ok? God honoring?
I would be most grateful if you would get specific about “manhood being under attack.” This is one of those lines that is used as a proof text without any proof.
Firstly, you are addressing a mainly evangelical audience. Within much of the evangelical world, women cannot be pastors, elders or “have authority over men.”
Secondly, women are told to submit to man’s leadership in the family. This, by the way, is another ill-defined term since it appears to mean almost nothing at all unless you can attempt to define it better than the CBMW crowd.
Then, women are told by none other than John Piper to endure abuse for a night, not to get muscular and be very careful not to usurp a man’s leadership when they ask you for road directions. Each of these statements we have addressed on this blog and it has been addressed all over the internet.
So, within the safe halls evangelicalism, men are not only safe, but they hold the power. In fact, it is women who have more to be concerned about.
Now, if you think that the “Act Like Men” conference is going to change mainline denominations, you have been sold a bill of goods. The only ones who give a hoot about the conference are already in control so it is simply a matter of preaching to the choir.
So, enjoy a microbrew, an imported cigar and cheer for cage fighting- men are safe.
dee, you are so gifted in the use of words! I so enjoy everything you write; content, context, humor, satire, etc. Thanks for using your gift for the benefit of all of those who come daily to read them!
This is so funny to me.
A Driscolite told me to go watch a Driscoll sermon and see for myself what an awesome teacher he was.
So I did.
You know what I saw?
Driscoll was pointing the finger at others and picking apart and dissecting their good intentions without reason or really knowing or caring where those people were coming.
There was only one way, the right way, his way of looking at things. All that didn’t agree, he mocked and ridiculed to scorn without any mercy.
You know what else I found out?
When discussing Driscoll or anything, hardcore Drisconians won’t even take you seriously unless you adopt an arrogant, mockery ways of discussing things. You know why? Being peaceful and gracious is viewed as weak and feminine and wrong.
Which is what they are convinced you are anyway because you don’t agree with them. But being gracious only seals the deal for them.
So I’m just laughing inwards at your comment, Tyler.
Apparently it’s okay for Driscoll to be an over-the-top-jerk towards those he disagrees with. It’s all nice and ‘manly’ and stuff so that makes it okay.
The only thing is… he and his followers had better learn how to take what they dish out. Or better yet, they should just stop dishing it out, hand-over-fist, and then get all indignant when others don’t live by the double standard they try to set up.
And don’t forget to blame and attack both women and feminization (Eve?) for all your problems (like Adam did) rather than getting to the core of the issues of what is destroying the human race both inside and outside the church.
That said, there is a point to be made amidst all of the din. The church here in the UK suffers in many instances from being, not feminised, but infantilised. Collectively we are comfortable enough ministering healing to individuals, but not declaring justice to a society. We do need bold leaders – with or without penises. I only wish Mr Driscoll And Pastor James © were as passionate about defending the poor against sub-prime lenders as they are about defending the pulpit against women.
Is masculinity, or are men in general, under attack? Well, from a few quarters, yes. There are women who hate men. Some of them do so purely out of aggression. (The lack of a penis does not make one totally immune from sin.) That will always be the case. Bigots are bigots, whatever their DNA. There are men who hate women, too. There are people who hate Jews, people who hate other races, people who hate others because of their social background; people who hate people whose ears stick out (I went to school with some of them); people who hate other people for all sorts of bad reasons. All kinds of group human traits are under attack; there’s nothing special about masculinity in that respect. Trying to make men more aggressive ain’t going to stop the war.
Nick Bulbeck wrote:
May actually make it worse. As a long-time mediator, I can say that most men are already sufficiently aggressive, though not all, and that aggression makes it most difficult to reach win/win solutions, as aggressive men want to win more (aka I win she loses) than to reach a peaceful and jointly beneficial outcome.
I’m sure glad Deb and Dee are keeping up on everything going on elsewhere.
And I’m sure surprised that Driscoll/MacDonald defenders are still commenting on this September post in November.
I responded to Tyler above. But Ryan?
Ryan asked if we were okay with the attack on Manhood. Dee asked for proof of this attack. As of yet, none has been given. But Dee mentions the attack on women that is going on. And now I want to throw in my 2 cents. But my 2 cents turned in to $1.98 plus tax. So I made a post out of it.
This is for Ryan. And I’m looking for an answer. Is he okay with the attack on the feminine that is going in in evangelical circles?
Nick Bulbeck wrote:
I think infantilised is a great word for it.
I wouldn’t call Driscoll or MacDonald ‘masculine’ to be honest. They act like teenage boys that should have grown up a long time ago. Could be they need to be masculized a bit.
They are the Richie Incognito’s of the churchie world! Bullies are always good at pointing the finger at others, but have a really hard time looking at themselves.
Dude, why can’t I just leave this alone and move on?
Simple. It’s because of all the guys like you, Ryan, who have been influenced by the giant, money-making propaganda machine propelled by the likes of Driscoll and MacDonald. You have been truly convinced that there is a war on your manhood. So much so, that you come to a comment thread that is two months old and try to tell people that this war against you is really going on.
The Driscoll/MacDonald propaganda machine really has you guys under it’s spell so that you and your fellow ‘warriors’ spend lots of money on the war machine so Driscoll and MacDonald can be rich. (and you can be duped into believing that you have been helped)
Ryan, I am still waiting for proof of this war.
Meantime I have more proof of the actual war being carried out against women by Driscoll’s and MacDonald’s peers.
To everyone else, I apologize for dragging this thread out. It should have gone inactive some time ago.
But the Ryan’s and Tyler’s of this world who keep coming here trying to convince us that the Driscoll/MacDonald war machine is right and we are wrong, they need to see proof that their idols are just that, idols who do not speak for God concerning manhood and womanhood.
I just got back from Act Like Men in Indy. For $100 I got a charter bus ride to and from the event from Chicago, admission to the event, a meal, a hotel for the night, and a t-shirt. I bought no conference gear, nor did anyone else I was hanging with except for one guy who bought a pendant. Nothing wrong with the gear, but most older guys just don’t throw much money at that kind of thing. Women were not railed against, men were not pressed to conform to some rigid, non-biblical concept of manhood, and about 500 guys got saved, including one of the bus drivers. 12,600 men had an awesome time of worship and learning. So people can keep murmuring; it’s almost laughable.
@ MWorrell: You know, the strangest thing happened. We got a couple of emails from some “pastors” asking us for tickets to “Act Like Men.” Would you happen to know who might have decided to send us the emails? Surely it was from some “men” at the conference.
How do you know this to be true? Did they do an altar call?
What did you learn?
Keep dragging it out. We got some emails asking us for tickets to the conference from very strangely named men. Looks like some of the “boys” at Act Like Men could use a refresher.
And I’m STILL looking for proof that “Manhood” is under attack. I’ve given plenty of actual (but not exhaustive) proof that womanhood and femininity IS under attack by Driscoll and MacDonald’s cronies.
MWorrell, where is the proof of this war on manhood?
Get a clue. There isn’t any.
There is only a conjured up ‘war’ on manhood. This ‘war’ has been conjured so that men will feel the need to slap down $100 or more to the Warlocks who have conjured up this war. The Warlocks have done all this conjuring so that they can have lots of fame and money.
Men leaving this conference may have walked away with masculine warm-fuzzies, believing that their manhood has been uplifted. But they also leave with a paranoia concerning this war against them and they will find enemies where none exist.
As a point of reference: I sent my husband to Promise Keepers 20 years ago, wanting him to be uplifted in who he was as a man. He came back with those masculine warm-fuzzies. But he also came back on the defensive. He came back ’empowered’ to do battle with me and to prove to himself and to me who “wore the pants in the family”. Because this always seems to be the issue at these men’s conferences.
So if 500 guys got saved, is it reasonable to assume that there were many more non-believers there that left without being saved? Just wondering.
And the big question is, how is it that non-believers would pay to go to such a conference that is only advertised among the “insiders” so to speak? Such statements regarding the numbers of “salvations” sound fishy to me. Am I overly skeptical?
I can only imagine some of those strange names…
But I don’t have to imagine the spirit behind those kinds of emails. I’ve met that scoffing, mocking immaturity you speak of from many a Driscoll Proselyte.
You will know them by their fruit.
I won’t post the link here, because of some of the photos in the CNN article, but just google “CNN Tampa GOP strip clubs.” The first article to appear contains this quote: ‘When the Christian group Promise Keepers held a convention in Tampa a couple of years ago, attendees flooded the 2001 Odyssey, co-owner Jim Kleinhans recalls. They had such a good time that “they kept their promise to come back the next night.”‘
For those who prefer not to see the photos, the 2001 Odyssey is a “gentleman’s club.”
Mara, I’m sorry for your experience with your husband, and I do not know what was presented at Promise Keepers rallies because I have never been to one. I don’t recall a war on manhood being a major thing (I didn’t mention any such idea). But I can tell you that at this conference any suggestion that men should be leaders at home was in a biblical context: that is, men are to love their wives as Christ loves His church – sacrificially. If you have no problem with how Christ loves His church, you would have no problem with anything men were challenged to do at Act Like Men. If men are to be like Christ, then I would say that biblical manhood is absolutely under attack. But the proper response is not to act macho and tough. It’s to rely more heavily on the Lord. “Let all that you do be done in love.”
Dee and Anon, they did have an alter call. And those men who responded were taken to another area to receive a Bible and some additional information. So that would be the source for the count. They gave an exact figure in excess of 500, but I didn’t commit it to memory. I think a lot of people brought unsaved friends; that would be my thought on the size of the response to the Gospel.
Dee, I personally learned that I have allowed my earthly father’s bad examples to occupy too much space in my life, and that I need to keep my eyes on my perfect heavenly Father and what His Word says. I also learned that I am very good at saying to my wife that I love her, but very poor and proving it by my actions and priorities. So we had a talk when I came home, and I shared some of these things, and we made some plans for going forward. Nothing “new”, but when the Bible is preached God has a way of getting the point across. It was a really great event that the Holy Spirit used to make some permanent impact on me.
One last testimony… 12,600 men hitting the restaurants in Indy for lunch meant every place was packed. Except Hooters, which I found funny. They even had the women stand out front to entice guys in, but they kept walking.
Since you didn’t go to the link to find out what I went through, let me cut and paste the Tony Evans “Promise Keepers” quote here for your enjoyment and entertainment.
“The first thing you do is sit down with your wife and say something like this: `Honey, I’ve made a terrible mistake. I’ve given you my role. I gave up leading this family, and I forced you to take my place. Now I must reclaim this role.’ Don’t misunderstand what I’m saying here. I’m not suggesting that you ask for your role back. I’m urging you to take it back.” He went on to say, “If you simply ask for it back, your wife is likely to refuse…Unfortunately, there can be no compromise here.”
These are words of conflict, setting up a “No compromise, take no prisoners” scenario which is the opposite of what both Jesus and Paul said.
Also, if you had gone to my link you might have found where there are links between the Shepherding movement and Promise Keepers and also a link between Promise Keeper phraseology and Driscoll Phraseology.
I don’t expect you to go to this link either.
But in it is a link to Driscoll acting macho and tough and talking about breaking noses.
And I am STILL waiting for evidence from you or someone else concerning this war on manhood. I still don’t see it even though people keep talking about it all the time like it is established fact. All I see is a war on the feminine and trying to remove it from public expression of worship by Piper (close friend of Driscoll) and Challies (another reformed dude) and Wilson (Who Piper believes is brilliant with Driscoll’s agreement).
I provided proof of all these things in links above. There are many posts here a TWW providing links to this war on the feminine.
No one has provided proof of the war on manhood in the church.
Dee is giving you a standing ovation in Raleigh!!!
Mara, I did go to the links, but I don’t have anything to do with Promise Keepers or Tony Evans, so I am choosing not to engage you on that matter. I see that it is a subject of great importance to you, and I respect that, but it doesn’t have anything to do with me and I don’t know enough about any of that to comment on it.
Additionally, I did not say there is a war on men. I don’t know who did, but that’s the person you should ask about that. I have a daughter and a son, and I would say that the cultural messages targeted at them both are horrid, and that if there is a war on men, it’s the same war on men that has been raging forever: to knock them off the narrow path of following Christ. It sounds like you are focused on some faction of people that I am unacquainted with.
Mark Driscoll is not my pastor. I heard him speak at the Act Like Men conference and he did not say to break anyone’s nose, and even if he had I follow Jesus, not Mark Driscoll. So I don;t really care what he says about breaking noses any more than I care when Benny Hinn says I should send him a bunch of money so I can be happy and healthy. In fact, that kinda bothers me more, because desperate old people will send Hinn money but they probably won’t break anyone’s nose. I feel that the exhortation I received at Act Like Men from all of the speakers was healthy and biblical.
I don’t think I have to answer for every joker that says something in a book or on YouTube. If you want to ask me something about James MacDonald, that’s another matter, because he actually IS my pastor and I wouldn’t be a member of his church and serving in it if I didn’t support him.
I just thought that since this was a blog post about Act Like Men, that a report from a person who actually went might be of interest.
You have proven to me that you are a straight up guy.
And I can respect that.
And I apologize for giving you heck.
My church if full of straight up guys like you.
Or I should say my soon to be former church is full of straight up guys like you.
I say former because I’m probably on the way out. Not because of the straight up guy there. But because they are listening to all this propaganda put out by certain members of these men’s groups. And things are changing, not for the best.
Truly, I don’t have problems with the idea of men’s conferences. I want men to be uplifted.
My problem is with who is leading them.
I will admit, I don’t know a lot about MacDonald. But I know way more than I want to about Driscoll. MacDonald associating with Driscoll puts MacDonald on my suspect list, very much so for reasons I won’t get into.
Anyway, I understand that you see no link between Promise Keepers and the Act Like Men crowd and the Courageous, Iron Sharpens Iron bunch.
But I see it because I’ve watched it evolve from Focus on the Family back in the 70s and 80s to Promise Keepers in the 80s and 90s to the present day. They are all connected, each one flowing into the next.
I am sure decent and better than decent guys can go to these things and come back still decent and better than decent. But I have witnessed the end of certain doctrinal stands that these groups take. The fruit is not so great. In fact, it is pretty much the opposite of what Jesus taught.
So, again, sorry for giving you heck.
But I have my reasons and they are associated more on the Driscoll side than the MacDonald side.
I hope you are doing well and that you continue in your walk with Christ.
Proverbs 4:18 But the path of the righteous is like the light of dawn,
That shines brighter and brighter until the full day.
@ Mara: Here is a post that appears to say thing were not what they seem at the conference.
I was wondering if MWorrell was giving the full story. It felt like he wasn’t. But I couldn’t prove it. Instead of telling him that he had “proven” to be an up straight man, I should of said that he appears to be.
Obviously, from the link you’ve given, the chauvinism that was alive and well in Promise Keepers is (as I feared) WORSE at the Act Like Men conference.
Quotes from the link:
“Chauvinistic mistreatment of women and pointless insensitive generalities peppered the teaching earlier in the night. Women take forever to get ready. Real men aren’t vegetarians. Women are only helpers. Men don’t follow, they lead. Real men don’t order low fat decaf lattes. Women are the weaker vessel.”
“Abuse your power. Demean women. This is what gives you the prize.”
Oh well, once again proven right.
I guess I was at a different conference from the one the blogger linked to above was at, and I think my wife would tell you I am posting here in complete sincerity. I have no interest in spinning my conference experience.
“Abuse your power. Demean women. This is what gives you the prize.”
I just don’t know what to say except that I heard every speaker start to finish and I heard absolutely nothing of the kind said or implied. In fact, of the four men I spent my time with at ALM, all of them would be flatly offended at the suggestion that they had participated in an event with that kind of message. We love and respect our wives as equals. To the degree we believe we are called to be leaders, leaders wash the feet. Leaders lay down their lives. Leaders SERVE. That was the message of the conference, and the fruit of that is obvious to my wife. She’s glad I went.
I mean, if someone regards a few jokes about stereotypes (most of them self deprecating towards men) as a sexist failure, fine. It’s probably not everyone’s idea of a great weekend. I personally do not like going to conferences where mainline protestant ministers in tweed jackets and turtlenecks with conspicuous cross pendants worn on the outside talk about why Jesus wants you to drink fair trade coffee. That’s why the Church is a big, diverse place.
Huh? You either go to your act like men conference or you go to one which discusses “fair trade coffee?” Your stereotyping is showing.
Let me challenge you on your throw away quip. I happened to visit areas in Central America in which children are worked to the bone, making little money, picking beans while living in poverty. I guess “real” men don’t give a hoot about children who are being sold into slavery and working to pick the beans for your manly triple shot espresso. Bottom’s up!
It was supposed to be funny, but hey.
Huh? I challenged you about the plight of children who are often sold into slavery to ruthless coffee plantation owners. They live horrible lives, beyond imagining. Your response, on a failed joke about this is “But hey?”
This is exactly the problem that some of us have with these men’s conferences. They are a mile wide and an inch deep. You have men teaching that have serious problems with their lives and churches and you expect to get quality teaching when some of these guys can’t even manage their own lives and debts. Guys who advocate punching out their own elders and throwing them under the bus.
The motto of your conference?
“Men who are loud and ruthless about their own sin, but patient and full of grace in leading others. Men who long to follow God without limits and meet the needs of those around them without hesitation.
To get there we need radical surgery. It’s time to cut deep and get it all, and not be afraid of what that means. We challenge you to join thousands of men for a two-day conference this fall-to step up with us and Act Like Men.”
But hey, who cares?
Actually, MWorrell, you’ve hit on something here.
First off, I do believe that you are commenting here in all sincerity. And I do believe that you are surprised by the hostility shown here.
I prefer to talk to guys like you than the drive bys we often get.
You may never agree with us. You may never fully understand the concerns that we have. You may continue to dismiss some of our concerns, really thinking that they are no big deal. But at least you are willing to talk about it in a civilized manner. Just know that I do respect you for this.
Now back to where I quote you.
There are stereotypes. And I do understand laughing at some of the differences between men and women rather than getting hostile or bent out of shape.
But there is deeper level that so many dismiss because it is easier than caring about it. Caring about things make people feel vulnerable. And the stereotype that we all live with it that it’s okay for women to be vulnerable, but not men.
Anyway, Stereotypes exist. Where I have an issues is when the stereotypes become the all encompassing story. All men are supposed to be this and do that. All women are like this and act like that.
Guys get locked into these thought. It makes sense of this confusing world and it’s easy for them to make light of a woman’s issue or concern because women are ‘like that’. Women care too much for things that aren’t that big of a deal.
Well, perhaps those things really are a big deal and shouldn’t be dismissed, or worse yet, minimalized and mocked.
This comment got too long and I’ve barely scratched the surface of what I mean. But my bottom line is this.
Dee is correct in expressing concern over these conferences. They play at “getting to the deeper things”. But really, they come across as just some of the same old, kumbya that keeps everyone and everything in their boxes (especially women, and including God) that make men feel better, more important, and more in control of our lives.
You are free to give me evidence of it being otherwise.
I know the appropriateness of using stereotypes as a vehicle for humor divides a lot of people; I personally feel it comes down to the intentions of the person doing the talking as well as the degree to which the stereotype is a basis for injustice, which is probably even more divisive.
I grew up with what I would call “Sesame Street” values as it relates to race and gender, as that show was fairly indicative of the way in which I was socialized as a kid (and it was reinforced at home). That is, there is no significant difference in capability or value between people of any kind. I don’t find that to be at odds with some essential facts about life, like that my wife has babies, and I have to move the heavy objects in the house. Neither do I find it to be at odds with Scripture, particularly once we separate the biblical picture of womanhood from Leave it to Beaver.
I belong to a church that many people would consider patriarchal. I understand why they would think that, I think I have a pretty good grasp of the opposing point(s) of view, and yet this is the church my wife and I have decided to join. Here’s an interesting tidbit. When we attended the membership class, one of the statements made by the assistant pastor was that we would “never see a woman in the pulpit”. That so angered me that as we walked to the car, I flatly said, “I cannot join this church.” It was my wife who talked me down, and eventually I agreed to stick with it and give it a chance. (I might also note that prior to that time I had attended a C&MA church and had been making inquiries with the national HQ about how a denomination that gave its first preaching award to a women no longer ordained them).
So I have been a reluctant convert to the concept of male leadership. My wife, who is divorced from a man she regarded as pathetically passive, seems to appreciate the teaching a great deal. I do not consider it to me an essential doctrine of the faith, but I see that it is beneficial in practical ways. But if next week I started attending a pentecostal church with a female pastor, I’d do fine, and would no doubt have similar peripheral areas of doctrinal disagreement.
The men in my church seem (to me) to be unusually transparent, emotionally mature and aware, as well as respectful of their wives. We meet every other Saturday and check in with each other in these areas:
So I am accustomed to sharing with men on a pretty substantial level, all under the encouragement of my church (women would receive the same encouragement, of course). And I can say the the Act Like Men was not just a cheerleading session. It was substantive and highly challenging, and focused on love, not brawn.
I happen to know some men who would scoff at such things, and many of them are secret porn hounds who act like their wife is their parent. This is not an intellectual exercise, this issue of what men believe. The consequences are in the newspapers.
MWorrel: “When we attended the membership class, one of the statements made by the assistant pastor was that we would “never see a woman in the pulpit”. That so angered me that as we walked to the car, I flatly said, ‘I cannot join this church.’ ”
MWorrel: “But if next week I started attending a pentecostal church with a female pastor, I’d do fine, and would no doubt have similar peripheral areas of doctrinal disagreement.”
I see that going to these churches and conferences has not completely ruined you. 😉
I’ve also seen both sides.
But I’ve seen more abuse on the Male Leadership side than on the other.
I’ve seen that a lot of men simple cannot handle that much authority and are not ready for it when it is dumped upon them. I’ve see such authority go straight to a lot men’s heads.
Being a former pastor’s wife (husband no longer a pastor, I’m still married to him) I saw the damage that occurred when relationships were reduced to roles and hierarchy. I soon realized that it was more important to teach people the golden rule than the golden roles and hierarchy.
Anyway, that’s what I’ve seen.
If what you say is true concerning your church, the men in your church, and MacDonald himself, all I can say is that though I cannot agree with the patriarchy part, I still believe that God can work through such situations.
I only wish MacDonald wouldn’t hang out with, support, or otherwise give legitimacy to Driscoll’s ministry.
have any of you ever spoken directly with any of these people? it is easy and effective.
To which people are you referring. We know people like elders who have been harmed by James MacDonald. We have written extensively on Mark Driscoll and have spoken to many he has hurt.Driscoll is well known for his teaching like Queen Esther the Slut.
Any conference which features either of these men are suspect.
We have read and watched videos of these guys probably more than most people. They have made their lives and thoughts known in pubic way. And we do not like what we see.
So, exactly what d you mean by “effective?” I doubt Driscoll will stop having provisions and chances are macDonald will not move out of his mansion while his church deals with horrific debt. Yep-Act Like Men has some great role models!
@ dan: I agree with Dan. His comment is both effective and easily read.
As a member of Harvest, I would simply caution people not to believe everything they read, and especially without balancing information. For the first time in my life my own church, pastor and leadership are under scrutiny from the outside, and it has represented an education for me in how outright falsehoods and lopsided speculation take on a life of their own via the internet. Some of the criticism has been well-intentioned, and I can see major responses and changes in Harvest as a result. They have never said that none of the criticism has merit, and James MacDonald is without a doubt the most transparent pastor I have ever had.
If true, what a sad indictment of the church that is.
Seriously? He ignored and threw out his own elders. He got the church into serious debt. He lives large. I am so, so sorry that you believe this to be true.
@ TedS.: Just saw this. My comment echoes yours. How utterly depressing if McDonald is the most transparent pastor this poor man has ever known.
Requires a new definition of “transparent” (spouse’s 5th grade class studying transparency in science!). Unless he means that everyone can see through the exterior and see the greed and avarice clearly, like some of the elders and a lot of outside observers have. Perhaps to a Harvester, when they see MacDonald it is like looking in a mirror and they are confused and call it transparency.
Having attended the conference myself, I can say that you apparently have something out for these men. Whether you agree with them theologically or not, God is doing a great work in the lives of many men through this conference and through these men. It was not a conference about beating your chest, eating raw meat, and being a cave man. Rather it was about loving your God and family.
Take a look at Philippians 1:15-18 to see how Paul handled others preaching Christ in a way contrary to how he did it…
Could you define “great work?” That is one of those Christianese terms that has little to no meaning without a demonstration. For example, I think the Apostle Paul did a great work as did Martin Luther, John Wesley, William Wilberforce, etc. So, could you please explain to us the “great” work?
Also, do you believe getting a church movement into $60 million in debt is a “great” work?’ How about all those elders who have spoken out against this? Those leaders who were excommunicated? Was this also a “great” work?
How about the guy behind all of this? You know, the guy with pornovisions, implying that Queen Esther a slut, threatening to punch out those leaders who disagree with him, making fun of “effeminate” worship leaders and dissing the clerics in the Anglican denomination who wear “dresses? Are those “great” works?”
I don’t see greatness. Just the same old, same old mediocrity. Convince me that I am wrong.
Interesting that people are criticizing an event they apparently didn’t attend and are clearly uninformed about. If you question the real focus of the conference either attend it to evaluate it or watch the recordings. Turns out, the focus was on the truth in the 1 Corinthians 16:13-14! Gossip and backbiting like this is hobbling Christianity. You might ask yourself what YOU are doing to encourage Christian men in their faith around you. That’d be far more productive than this sarcastic sniping from afar. Or would you rather have men sit at home watching football rather than taking a weekend to focus on God and His truth? The conference did not emphasis wearing any certain attire and was not “hyper masculine” and didn’t advocate being a tough guy. The masculinity they were calling men to is the Biblical version, not muscle flexing and grunting world’s version of being a man. Again, watch the recordings instead of making baseless assumptions. It was not “vague and confusing”, but rather straight forward and right from Scripture.
The cost? It takes money to rent a massive convention center, just like any other large event. You ask how this furthers the kingdom of God? Ask the men who actually attended and were challenged and called to change by the truth from the Word. If the truth penetrated hearts and began change in men’s lives, what’s it to you if those that attended paid admission? Being a professional critic of those who minister is exactly what the enemy of our souls wants. At the very least, be informed about what was actually taught at the conference before passing judgment.
Glad to see others who actually attending are adding some facts to the mix.
I hope that you realize that we are providing a venue for you to push back. Many blogs, like those written by MacDonald, Driscoll and others only pontificate and do not provide an opportunity for alternative viewpoints. And we allow critical comments directed towards us, unlike some of the other men at the conference who only allow “atta boy” comments. Think of it this way. We are paying to let you critique us.
Interestingly, we have. Did you know that this past weekend I attended the baptism of a man who came to this blog, angry and burned out and in the agnostic camp? During that time, I also met some men who read this blog who have found peace, love and support here. And then there is my husband who thinks this blog is awesome and supports me. So, I think I have done that.
We do not accept ads and pay for this blog out of our own pocket. We do that on purpose so “professional” doesn’t cut it unlike some of the guys behind your conference who live in million dollar homes and have expensive lifestyles. They do appreciate your contribution to the coffers, by the way. Big house have big budgets to maintain.Nate wrote:
Finally, we know quite a bit about what the conference organizers believe. If you spent some time reading our blog you might be startled to find out what we know.
As for stuff being “right from Scripture” you might want to change it to being “right from the interpretation of the conference organizers’ of Scripture.”
Thank you for taking the time to comment.
Re: “As for stuff being ‘right from Scripture’ you might want to change it to being ‘right from the interpretation of the conference organizers’ of Scripture.”
Well, that’s true of almost anything… I have never read a book by a Christian author that did not have some statement I could take exception to. If I want to like that particular book, and I consider the rest of his/her books and writings, it’s probably worse. Add everything they’ve ever said (which, increasingly, is actually available on YouTube), and there’s no way anyone is 100% agreeable.
That’s why these debates are often so circular and fruitless. Once you get beyond the creeds, you have to agree to disagree. I just don’t see the point of banging on and on about ministries that differ on minors when there are full blown cults out there to contend with. There’s no end to it.
Issues at Harvest Bible Chapel are a good example. If someone doesn’t like James MacDonald’s theology, by all means comment publicly on it because it is broadcast publicly. Don’t make a lifestyle out of it, but have your say.
But if you don’t like our elder structure? Or how we set salaries? Or how we manage our budget? Or how we execute church discipline? I already have elders for the purpose of leading my church, and I really have no need for half-informed people outside my church trying to override my own local church elder board.
Dee, you have your opinion about what the conference organizers believe and you’re entitled to that. However, I don’t see how you can justify the criticisms leveled at the conference when you didn’t attend to hear the messages that were preached. I don’t expect the messenger to be perfect, it’s the truth of the Word that’s important. Which can be used by God in spite of the speaker.
Neither is this messenger perfect. However, one must take the overall message of those who put the conference together. Let’s start with Mark Driscoll. He believes that Queen Esther was a slut. His words, not mine. He has said a number of others statements about women, including his own wife, which are disturbing to say the least.
So, you are telling me that a man with that view of women is going to come up with good theology to teach to other men on issues like how to view gender and marriage? Don’t buy it. There will be basic assumptions and flaws.
That is akin to saying that occasionally Osteen actually interprets a passage right so we should go to one of his conferences.
Here is my view on the men’s conference. It is just one more way for the organizers to make money on the backs of really nice men who think they are getting a new message on how to be “real men.” You aren’t. Pick up a book on Amazon’s resell page. Read your Bible. You’ll get just as much there. And you’ll have some money left over to take your wife out to dinner, hire someone to clean the house on occasion, take a trip together.
And spend some time looking at how some of the organizers of these conferences (as well as selling you books) live. They really appreciate your investment in their lovely million dollar homes.
Better way to spend the money is to treat your spouse to something that builds your relationship. Take time to celebrate anniversaries, and not just your marriage anniversary. Celebrate the day you met her, the day she said yes or asked you to marry her (it happened to me that way!), and any other special day. If possible, take the day or two days, and spend that time together. We take a weekend in either January or March (our two anniversaries we celebrate then, and one is always near a weekend) every year, go out of town overnight, and celebrate being us. Usually it is a short driving trip, a nice dinner, a motel, a little sight seeing, and a lot of conversation about our lives together, reminiscing about how we became us and how we have celebrated us. Worth tons more than any conference I could attend. We started the practice b/k, had to “impose” on grandparents and aunts/uncles when the children were little, and have really enjoyed now that we are empty nesters.
Dee, I’m sorry, but there is so much judging of the men at this conference on your part. Based on your statements, you seem to think you know why they were there, that they are looking for new info rather than a proclamation of God’s unchanging Word, that they are ignorant about the financial facet of such events, that they neglect the practical care and appreciation of their wives so they can blow money on empty weekends. As a man who attended and benefited from the weekend, I utterly reject your portrayal. It is no doubt true of at least some men, I am certain, but throw a rock in the air; you’ll hit someone guilty.
I fully agree with you on many of Driscoll’s failings, but they do not amount to a betrayal of orthodox doctrine. They are debatable issues, even if I would not join his church. If you tell me he’s no longer preaching the essentials, you’ll have my full attention.
It just seems you have no ears for anything good about the weekend. I have what the Holy Spirit applied to me from it, and that’s enough for me.
There is betrayal of orthodox doctrine.
And there is a Huge betrayal of women.
Driscoll is barely qualified (if at all) to teach men basic doctrine.
He absolutely NOT qualified to teach men how to be men OR how to view and treat women. He simple is not qualified to hold these conferences or to be an invited speaker to them.
Oh brother. “Orthodox” doctrine is simply what a few men decide it is at different points in history and it changes.
It is about a “relationship”. Driscoll gets an F
These men all came to Driscoll’s venue, and lent their names to the conference – which shouts to the world their endorsement – thus providing Driscoll with a springboard to more fame and marketability. Why don’t these guys get it?
MWorrell, my dear brother, that is precisely what they amount to.
The demons have orthodox doctrine, but it hasn’t emptied them of rebelliousness or pride. The one who says “I love God” but does not love his brother is not less than totally effective; he is a liar. Driscoll may make play out of his doctrine of hell, and the fact that this makes him more sound than the Emergents. But he doesn’t really believe in it; or at least, he doesn’t believe in a vital corollary of hell, which is that the first will be last and the last first. (Otherwise, he wouldn’t strive so hard to be first.) He might make play out of the fact that he believes that Jesus died on the cross for his sins; but, as evidenced by his behaviour towards Justin Brierley, that “belief” does not move him to worship but to prideful boasting. I could go on.
The fruit of the spirit is not twitter followers nor even congregational followers; it’s described by Paul in terms of a person’s character attributes. Orthodox doctrine is merely a part of a means to an end, and the man who uses credal orthodoxy as a cover for his unregenerate character has certainly betrayed it. As long as we judge leaders by their doctrine (which is the easiest thing in the world to manufacture), and not by the fruit evidenced in their characters, we’ll never lack deception.
@ Nick Bulbeck:
PREACH IT, brother.
They want the money and the notoriety. This is not about mission but money.
Really? is it lacking in their churches?
Betcha many didn’t know about the lifestyles of the organizers.
Didn’t say that if you read carefully. However,since this had nothing to do with the care of your wives,why are so many saying that it was? I am confused.
Hmm-Queen Esther is a slut? Leave that aside for a moment. Orthodox doctrine is only as good as it expresses itself in the loving out of the life of the church.Take a look at Mark Driscoll-Did I Stutter on this blog and tell me you think this constitutes “orthodox” theology.MWorrell wrote:
He isn’t on most Sundays in my opinion. And I have read a boatload. I particularly find his pornovisions bizarre.
The word “execute” probably best describes Driscoll’s technique. Great word! And some church discipline is downright abusive. However, I bet that at your church and others you do not define what it is and for what it is used. It is an open ended definition with an open ended set of consequences. There are no “rules of the game.”
Some only use it in the case of a situation as presented in Corinthians-guy sleeps with mother in law and preaches that it is cool. Many use it when someone dares question the pastor about the change in theology, how much he makes, or even how much debt the church is taking on. Read the case of Paul Petry and Bent Meyer and see how “theologically orthodox” Driscoll deals with it. I didn’t know that screwing your long time friends and elders was a theologically orthodox maneuver.
TWW has written extensively on the topic. Here is one.
You guys probably know more about that than I do. I can comment on what I hear Driscoll say publicly, but I’m not going to draw conclusions about him from second-hand accounts of people I don’t even know. That is the business of those in his congregation and their elders, and those close enough to know the actual facts. I personally would not join his church based on some things I have actually heard him say.
Like I said, a lot of info is flying around about Harvest Bible Chapel and James MacDonald that simply is not factual, and that has educated me about the reliability of info I encounter about ministries and pastors.
“Souls Saved”, the Christianese Currency.
And MONEY TALKS.
P.S. “Souls”, not people. KA-CHING!
A God Can Do no Wrong.
Completely agree, brother. Each of the 4 men in our group brought priceless truth away from the conference. Matt Chandler’s message reminding us about our position in Christ was my favorite. We had great discussion to and from the conference since we had a 5 hour drive to Indianapolis.
Maybe 500 guys got saved. Maybe many more than 500 got saved, but the Holy Spirit didn’t lead them to go forward or otherwise respond in a way that would have registered in the stats (quite possible). Maybe only a handful got saved; maybe nobody got saved. Time will tell.
For the record (and I don’t sell many records at that), I have no issue with conferences as such. They had them in ancient Israel, after all. Large gatherings are a valid part of church life. As long as it’s not a substitute for the rest of church life, and as long as the exhilaration of the stadium experience doesn’t become confused with “the presence of God”, I don’t doubt they can be beneficial.
I do think that many conferences are a missed opportunity, though. The concept of “local church” in practice nearly always means “local churches” – i.e., monocultural groups who meet near one another but isolated from one another, having (to cite the verse from Hebrews usually pushed into the faces of “nones”) forsaken assembling together, or indeed having anything to do with one another. Conferences are one of the few established activities whereby believers may actually rub shoulders with believers from very different backgrounds. Big conferences with little-known speakers, representing grass-roots organisations serving in areas that are under-represented in current Christian literature, could teach us a great deal about how to love one another.
I have previously participated in a wonderful weekend experience, once as a first-timer, and twice as a volunteer. The entire event is volunteer based, no paid speakers, because it is an honor to be asked to speak. Emmaus Walks are put on by local volunteer groups of Christians, with some national coordination by the Upper Room (http://emmaus.upperroom.org/). Participants, including volunteers, pay for their room and board (all meals included), usually at a cost much less than the conference fee at most religiously affiliated conferences. The events run from Thursday evening through Sunday afternoon, and include a number of really moving and spiritual worship experiences, great fellowship, talks by both clergy and laity, and great (and fun) music. Events are held separately for men and women. The local groups also put on similar events for teenagers and there is a program for prisoners. There are ongoing gatherings for participants following the weekend experience, consisting of worship and fellowship, as well as voluntary small groups for weekly fellowship and accountability.
And there are conversions and recommitments that occur at these events, and few leave unchanged, but there is no compulsion.
So if you are looking for an opportunity for a real, non-profit, volunteer-driven, religious conference type experience, check out Walk to Emmaus (http://emmaus.upperroom.org/).
I have an idea. Why don’t you read this post written by Dr James Duncan of Anderson University on how “numbers” should be viewed with some skepticism.
@ Nate: I have no ears for anything good. Another Christianese expression. If I had no “ears” for that, then why do I let you post your positive experiences on my blog? Heck, we even pay to allow you to do this since we do no take advertisements. We are giving you a forum and we didn’t even ask for a registration fee!
See how many of the leaders at your forum not only allow comments on their writings but then allow people to disagree with them.
@ An Attorney:
The thing is, there is no good reason why the church in any local area could not operate like that all the time. With much expansion on the idea of “fellowship” – groupings of people with similar callings and complementary gifts, building one another up in the pursuit of the Father’s will in their communities.
Additionally, of course, these would be people seated with Christ in heaven, and able to pray with the authority of Christ’s co-heirs. So when they get together, unrealistic things really happen, along with the hopelessly impractical and the politically impossible. If that was the substance of Matt Chandler’s message reminding us about our position in Christ cited by Nate above, then there may be cause for optimism.
So they say. Between those feel only a momentary enthusiasm and those who join in because of a herd mentality, I consider such claims to be suspect. Anyone ever done any follow-up on any of these mass conversions? In how many of claiming to be converted that day did it actually make a permanent change to a Christian way of life? My guess is very few. It seems to me it’s a lot like the claims that a large number of people have been healed by someone who claims to be a faith healer.
Nick Bulbeck wrote:
Nick, I love this! It turns the whole idea of leadership upside down, which is exactly the habit of Jesus. How does a degree from seminary measure strength of character? I can tell you firsthand, as a graduate of a Bible college, that I learned just as much about deviance as I did about divinity! It breeds a sense of entitlement, and like you said Nick, of an ambition to lead. In churches today, I witness less of a humble “Who am I to speak for You LORD?” and more and more of a “Do you not know who I am to speak for the LORD?”
It’s weird that some Christians get so hung up on gender role stuff.
The Bible says there is neither male nor female in Christ Jesus.
If the Bible does not place a premium on gender roles, and I don’t see that it does (‘there is neither male nor female…’), or trying to minutely define “biblical man hood” (or womanhood) seems like overkill and a waste of time for Christians to put on so many conferences about what it means to be a man (or woman) and keep pumping out so many books about it.
I don’t believe worrying about, or trying to fight, feminism, transgenderism, and homosexuality (as some Christians do) excuses the obsessive preoccupation with “biblical manhood and womanhood,” or makes a staunch defense of it necessary.
It looks like being a Christian is wrapped up in following Jesus, and
I see no mention in there of holding “how to act like a man” conference.
I think it likely comes down to money. The people pushing all the “biblical manhood/womanhood” books and conferences must be making a nice, tidy sum off all the materials and meetings.
Didn’t Driscoll admit in a video online or a blog page that he doesn’t know the bible’s original languages and acts rather proud of this? I think Chris Rosebrough brought it up on his show, and Deb and Dee may have blogged about it too.
Driscoll has also bragged about writing a two hour sermon in five minutes or something.
Mark Driscoll doesn’t want you to study the Bible
That page quotes MD as saying,
Guy does not mind letting people know he is not an intellectual and does not do much studying, probably because (just a guess) he looks more like a “cool bro” to the 20 year old guys if he paints a picture of himself as sitting around watching football and drinking beer, not with his nose in a ancient Hebrew language lexicon.
Driscoll also teaches that Song of Solomon and other biblical passages teaches that Jesus wants women to perform oral sex on their husbands.
Of course in MD’s world it does. 🙄
A very feminist female preacher may likely find evidence that the Bible / Song of Solomon teaches that husbands are to wash the dishes every night and take out the trash without being asked or nagged.
It’s amazing what one can think or insist the Bible supports and says if you read it with a personal preferences filter.
Not that I think the Bible is vague on every topic under the sun, I believe it is indeed totally clear on some issues, but on others, like wives owing their men oral sex? LOL!!!! I don’t think so. Keep dreaming, Driscoll.
Mark Driscoll’s Oral Fixation
Billy Graham Ministries, to their credit, made some effort to collect precisely that information. Even they reckoned on a 90% drop off rate a year after a BG rally. Caveat: I think they based that information on regular church attendance, which isn’t the only measure, or even necessarily a good one.
So in spiritual terms – that is, access to the Gospel and our oneness in Christ, that is most certainly true. But I am curious how someone who asserts that there are no biblical gender roles reconciles that concept with God’s obvious decision to make women biological mothers and men biological fathers. Setting aside any rigid concepts of “biblical” manhood/womanhood that are obviously indefensible, it would seem plain that God has instituted a purposeful distinctiveness.
In terms of the concept of acting like a man, “act like a man” is a completely legitimate translation of the biblical language, which appears also in surrounding verses to define in rather precise terms what acting like a man looks like.
In the end, there are women who want men to conform to modern gender stereotypes, and women who do not. As long as there are both kinds of women looking to date and get married, your opinion is just an opinion. Why not seek out a like-minded man and let other people run their own lives (and conferences)? I don’t run around telling stay-at-home dads that they need to change. Part of maturity is accepting that many people have different opinions from you, even about things you regard as very important.
That would be your particular interpretation of that text. I don’t share it. It is non-sensical to tell someone they are equal spiritually but not in other ways.
You said, “But I am curious how someone who asserts that there are no biblical gender roles reconciles that concept with God’s obvious decision to make women biological mothers and men biological fathers. Setting aside any rigid concepts of “biblical” manhood/womanhood that are obviously indefensible, it would seem plain that God has instituted a purposeful distinctiveness.”
The Bible doesn’t teach “gender roles.”
I don’t see what biological differences have to do with anything, or how bio differences can be used to limit women’s talents and gifts.
A woman may have a God given gifting or talent at teaching, even if she is capable of having being pregnant
“In the end, there are women who want men to conform to modern gender stereotypes, and women who do not.”
Women who do not wish to conform to gender compism, how they define womanhood, are often rather insulted over it. It is implied that they are not quite Christian, or are rebelling against God and the Bible, etc.
The irony is, I am not opposed to the notion of a woman being a wife and mommy if that is what she chooses for herself, and I have been treated rudely for saying so by secular feminists on other sites.
My issue is that segments of Christianity (e.g., gender complementarians) teach it is “biblical truth” that a woman’s only, or highest, calling is to be a wife and mommy, and that women may not use any of their gifts (such as teaching or leading).
Many of these gender comp teachings, as I was just saying on another post, are about totally irrelevant to never married and childless adult women such as myself, because the only “gender roles” they define only discuss men and women in regards to marriage and parenting.
Gender compism does not know what to do with never married men and women who are age 40 or older.
Gender complementarians do not truly seek to define manhood and womanhood in generalized terms, but rather, -justify and rationalize why men get to hold all the power over women in churches, and
– why a wife must always submit to a spouse.
Point 2 is particularly irrelevant to never married females.
As I said on another post, I’ve always chatted with never married, childless, adult Christian men on other sites who find nothing of value in gender compism either, because they do not define themselves by having a wife or children.
I don’t think I was telling you to change, merely expressing a differing opinion. Your post was condescending as all get out.
“it would seem plain that God has instituted a purposeful distinctiveness.”
Bio differences do not necessitate keeping women out of ministry and so forth. It does not follow.
I’m glad you got something out of the conference, and as I said, I don’t begrudge conferences. But you must realise that you’re entering this discussion from the same direction as some high-profile preachers who certainly want both men and women to conform to gender stereotypes, purportedly “biblical” but defined by themselves (and sometimes to a level of detail that is beyond parody). And who in some cases desperately lack the maturity to believe that many experienced and knowledgeable people have opinions different from them.
You also said:
In the spirit of acknowledging other opinions, I will take this as a genuine question and answer it as best I can. Certainly God created them male and female; it was not good for the man to be alone. Whether it is the distinctiveness, or the interdependence, that was purposeful is quite important. I believe the latter, since in Christ there is neither male nor female and in Matthew 22 Jesus strongly hints (“At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven”) that the distinction is temporary. Another reason why it’s risky to extrapolate detailed spiritual boundaries from physical differences.
For another thing, it’s a question of gifting and capacity. A woman who has no leadership gift, or wants to treat everybody as a baby who needs nurturing (those women do exist – and there are men like that too) should certainly be excluded from most leadership roles. A man whose caring nature causes his heart to ache and yearn to gestate and suckle a child… should grow up and get over it, and find something God has equipped him to do. But a woman of sharp intellect, broad mind and Christ-like character who has a demonstrable gift at unpacking truth so that it becomes manifest in people’s lives should not be prevented from doing so on biological grounds.
…God’s obvious decision to make women biological mothers and men biological fathers…
I think that it is because we are of the Class Mammalia and Meiosis (cell division into haploid gametes i.e. containing half the genetic material of the parent cell) is how life on earth works to give genetically unique individuals instead of cloning (vegetative reproduction) like amoebas and ‘hen and chicken’ plants.
But, being a human being is more than whether or not one is male or female. As Christians, we believe Jesus is our example of what it truly means to be human. I am finding that as I tackle being mother to my children, I gain insight into how God loves me as my Heavenly Father.
Apart from obvious physical differences, I don’t think God expects us to be limited by gender. He has a disconcerting habit of going against societal norms to carry out His plans: youngest sons, barren women, a carpenter from Nazareth who, by the way, found greater faith in a foreign woman and a Roman centurion than amongst his own people.
Thanks for the thoughtful responses… very much appreciated.
Nick Bulbeck wrote:
Nick – ???! I remember the actor Dustin Hoffman talking about the overwhelming need/desire he felt to be able to nurse his infant granddaughter – that’s how loving and protective he felt. She triggered a *lot* of oxytocin – and, obviously, love – in him.
I don’t think that wanting to nurture an infant or child in this way is weird or wrong, and neither, I suspect, do you – but it *is* something that is not acceptable (for the most part) for men to admit to or talk about. I’m glad Hoffman did.
As for actually nursing a baby, there are men who are able to produce mil. No kidding.
My guess is that this is all a human thing, not confined to one gender. But it’s “acceptable” for women to do it, not so “acceptable” for men.
@ numo: Though I *do* agree that if a guy has a particularly nurturing bent/temperament, there are things he can do (besides/instead of being a father) that allow him to express that side of himself and to help others – kids, adults, animals – in the process.
I really admire the men who are dedicated to caring for rescued/abused animals, for example. And there are lots of them, though women tend to outnumber them. Still, they’re there.
“And there was a cloud that shadowed them, and a voice came out of the cloud, saying, This is my beloved Son: hear him.” ~ Mark 9:7; Mark 9:6-8 (in Context)
The issue here is not one of free speech, the right to assemble, religious freedom, nor free enterprise, for that matter, but one of pastoral accountability.
Yes. Certain pastors on today’s religious scene have become autonomous in their sphere of influence.
In certain cases these 501(c)3 religious professionals have conveniently removed all other ‘voices’ but their own, thus setting themselves up to disregard any Nathan the Almighty would seek to place in their ministries.
‘History’ discovers this to be a slippery blind venture into madness, and tyranny.
One does not have to follow this type of religious tyranny into the jungles of Guyana to contemplate any possible outcome.
The framers of the American Constitution and the Bill Of Rights, wisely through a thorough examination of what makes for good government while presenting the least amount of interference, and burden in and upon the lives of its fair citizens, framed documents that have stood the test of time for that ‘balanced’ purpose since their ratification.
The foundational principles found in the bowels of these documents find their bedrock in the Old and New Testaments of the Bible.
The principles of the scriptures have held true for the western world…specifically after the Reformation in 1517.
The question one should ask is wether these principles, that have stood the test of time for so many years, are worthy of preservation in our churches, and in our nation.
This is seen as the greatest challenge the Americas and Western Europe faces today.
I pray a favorable outcome.
I N R I *
Iesous Nazoraios Basileus Ioudaios
They that has ears to hear, let them hear?
“Let him that hath an ear hear what the Spirit saith unto the Churches: To him that overcometh, will I give to eat of the tree of life which is in the midst of the Paradise of God.” ~ Jesus
Matthew 27:37 houtos esti Iesous basileus Ioudaios
Mark 15:26 basileus Ioudaios
John 19:19 Iesous Nazoraios basileus Ioudaios; * Iesvs Nazarenvs Rex Ivdaeorvm
Luke 23:38 houtos esti basileus Ioudaios